Hey everyone. For those of you who don't know what the CSL is, here's a quick intro: The Collegiate Starleague is an organized, competitive league based around a shared love of Starcraft (and Starcraft II now). We're currently about halfway through our fourth season (which will extend through the 10-11 school year), but if you're not currently involved, definitely send us an email at cstarleague@gmail.com, and that'll enable us to let you know when registration starts for the next season. Our goal with this league is first and foremost to provide a means for competitive collegiate gaming, and also to further the eSports scene.
In order words, we're a bunch of nerds who love Starcraft. If you love Starcraft, you belong with us.
And of course, coordinators, next match's lineups are due every Tuesday night at midnight PST!
Always check the CSL website for our most recent updates. Also, we're always looking for dedicated people to join the staff. Whether you're interested in writers/graphics/casters/admining, shoot us an email at cstarleague@gmail.com.
Submit your lineups! They are due Wednesday, Oct 20 6:59am GMT (GMT+00:00). DON'T BE LATE!!!
Week 1 Maps can be seen here. You can also see the each week's maps when you set your lineups.
Your Division's Default Match Times can be found here. Note that you are free to play your match at another time, as long as you let the other team know, and they agree.
Don't forget about CSL Mania! Contest entries are due November 1st, I hope you're all working on something great =P.
Five 1v1s, last one is an Ace (last season style) (83)
63%
Both: three 1v1s, a 2v2, and an Ace match (unique players for the non-Ace?) (30)
23%
Four 1v1s (unique players), with a 2v2 (whoever) (16)
12%
Don't care. (1)
1%
Other - specify in thread. (1)
1%
131 total votes
Your vote: What do you prefer for match format?
(Vote): Five 1v1s, last one is an Ace (last season style) (Vote): Four 1v1s (unique players), with a 2v2 (whoever) (Vote): Both: three 1v1s, a 2v2, and an Ace match (unique players for the non-Ace?) (Vote): Don't care. (Vote): Other - specify in thread.
Poll: Should new players (past X deadline) be allowed in the playoff?
Yes - as long as they join before the playoffs (45)
45%
Yes - provided they have played a match or two before the playoffs (21)
21%
Yes - regardless of when they join the team (including during playoffs) (17)
17%
No - once the CSL deadline for new players has passed, no deal (17)
17%
Other - specify in thread (0)
0%
100 total votes
Your vote: Should new players (past X deadline) be allowed in the playoff?
(Vote): Yes - regardless of when they join the team (including during playoffs) (Vote): Yes - as long as they join before the playoffs (Vote): Yes - provided they have played a match or two before the playoffs (Vote): No - once the CSL deadline for new players has passed, no deal (Vote): Other - specify in thread
Poll: What kind of map pool?
Some Blizzard, Some User (ie. ICCup) (55)
59%
Any Blizzard Ladder Maps (22)
23%
Run Ling Run (for all 5 sets) (7)
7%
All User Maps (ie. ICCup) (6)
6%
Certain Blizzard Maps (Specify) (4)
4%
Other - Specify in thread (0)
0%
94 total votes
Your vote: What kind of map pool?
(Vote): Any Blizzard Ladder Maps (Vote): Certain Blizzard Maps (Specify) (Vote): Some Blizzard, Some User (ie. ICCup) (Vote): All User Maps (ie. ICCup) (Vote): Run Ling Run (for all 5 sets) (Vote): Other - Specify in thread
List of Schools (same list from the site) - No longer being updated + Show Spoiler +
Arizona State University – Brandon Ewing Augustana College – No current coordinator/team Binghamton University – Jian Ruan British Columbia Institute of Technology – Cedstick California Polytechnic State University – Collin MacGregor California Institute of Technology – Daniel Chen Carleton University – Devin Denis Carnegie Mellon University – Philipp Liu Case Western Reserve University – Brandon Pak Colorado State University – Michael Barnes Columbia University – Jonathan Lee Cornell University – Alexander Lin Dalhousie University – Nick Soh Duke University – Ray Koh Emory University – Sanghoo Lee Ferris State University – Brett Pacholka Frostburg State University – Justin Zimmerman George Mason University – Bob Toner George Washington University – Drew Slotkin and John Goben Georgia Institute of Technology – Ryan Smith Harvard University – Ferris Zhang Harvey Mudd College – Richard Truong (main) and Kevin Riley Hampshire College – James Lantz (need confirmation) Indiana University – Rob Jiang James Madison – Matthew Veland Johns Hopkins University – Hao Min Pan Massachusetts Institute of Technology – Cory Li McGill University – No current coordinator/team McMaster University – Jerry Qian Michigan State University – Matt Li Mount Allison University – Shane Roussie (need confirmation) New York University – Kevin Zhou Northeastern University – Kyle Montag Oberlin College – David Doberne THE Ohio State University – Katie Tornwall Ohio University – Charlie Petrey (need confirmation) Peninsula College – Kristian Brevik (needs players) Princeton University – Mark Ha Purdue University – Jason TenBarge Rice University – Dennis Qian Rutgers University – Erik Sandberg Ryerson University – Douglas Penny South Dakota State University – John Kocher Stanford University – Elliott Jin Texas A&M – Morrell Munyon Tufts University – Eddie Hong University of California Berkeley – Andrew Poon (need confirmation) University of California Davis – Brian Eller University of California Irvine – Darren Chen University of California Los Angeles – Alexander Yu University of California Riverside – Jordan Lee University of California San Diego – Duran Parsi University of California Santa Barbara – Alan Zhan University of Central Florida – Jordan Toor University of Chicago – Jonathan Chandler University of Dayton – Cory Bowling University of Florida – No current coordinator/team University of Georgia – Joe Fang University of Guam – Jeremy Bevacqua University of Houston – Jim Tai University of Illinois – No current coordinator/team. (+Recommendation negative) University of Massachusetts (Amherst?) – Philip Teague University of Michigan – Tianyi Liu University of Minnesota – Daniel Garrison University of North Carolina Chapel Hill – Zhe Zhang University of North Texas – Ben Huang University of Ottawa – Logan Lewis University of Pennsylvania – Kevin Shi University of Southern California – Jane Chen University of Texas – Jason Cerrato University of Victoria – Josh Barnes University of Virginia – Caleb Chen University of Washington – Sebastian Morgan University of Waterloo – Steve Xian University of Western Ontario – Ali Abdulaal Utah Valley University – Austin Welch Valparaiso University – Adam Rectanus Virginia Institute of Technology – Alex Thomas Yale University – Sherwin Yu York University – Roy Kwan
On August 16 2010 17:46 Chaotic_flare wrote: oh, im not coordinator either, i was too lazy to be =D but uh yea..we lost the only girl we had in our starcraft club =[
You should try to guilt trip her into coming back.
Dude that sucks. What's the coordinator's id? panda guy?
On August 16 2010 17:56 NB wrote: UW, are we contacting by that email list or what? ...
You should specify which UW . Though I guess people that know you will know?
well im from canada.... thats should be clear >.<... U waterloo hwaiting!!!
sad how most of our members are on workterm or vacation and not on campus atm... the line up might be late but would be really strong.
wondering if we can recuit HuK and Silver though? they dont go to our school but they live near by the area and no school near by except us is participating.
On August 16 2010 17:56 NB wrote: UW, are we contacting by that email list or what? ...
You should specify which UW . Though I guess people that know you will know?
well im from canada.... thats should be clear >.<... U waterloo hwaiting!!!
sad how most of our members are on workterm or vacation and not on campus atm... the line up might be late but would be really strong.
wondering if we can recuit HuK and Silver though? they dont go to our school but they live near by the area and no school near by except us is participating.
kinda defeats the purpose of the league... it's like a college football team recruiting a professional football player just because he lives nearby
On August 16 2010 18:12 NB wrote: wondering if we can recuit HuK and Silver though? they dont go to our school but they live near by the area and no school near by except us is participating.
Haha yea that would be against the rules They have to currently be attending school in order to be on the roster.
On August 16 2010 17:56 NB wrote: UW, are we contacting by that email list or what? ...
You should specify which UW . Though I guess people that know you will know?
well im from canada.... thats should be clear >.<... U waterloo hwaiting!!!
sad how most of our members are on workterm or vacation and not on campus atm... the line up might be late but would be really strong.
wondering if we can recuit HuK and Silver though? they dont go to our school but they live near by the area and no school near by except us is participating.
kinda defeats the purpose of the league... it's like a college football team recruiting a professional football player just because he lives nearby
=.= but they are about same age... silver is grad student in Laurie if im not mistaking and some people on our line up last season are double degree between 2 universities. :>
but yeah, i guess its a little overkill =.=
On August 16 2010 18:16 rauk wrote: are you guys finally gonna put ucla and usc in the same division? )))
lmao.. cant wait to hear day9's comment on this =j
damn, only one of the schools listed is one that i might have a possibility of going to. well, i'd be very interested in starting a CSL team at whatever scholl i go to.
It's super easy to start a team! You just need 5 students to play and you're set :D So wherever you end up going you shouldn't have trouble finding 4 other people to play :D
On August 16 2010 21:59 aike wrote: It's super easy to start a team! You just need 5 students to play and you're set :D So wherever you end up going you shouldn't have trouble finding 4 other people to play :D
doesn't sound too hard. well, whenever i get accepted into my schools, i'll make a blog or something.
On August 17 2010 02:51 Sunyveil wrote: Do you mind adding emails so prospective players can contact their coordinators?
Hm. I'll add yours if you want. Just didn't want to add everyone's email without asking them :D. The way it's going now, prospective players just email us, and we cc/forward them to their school's coordinator.
On August 17 2010 08:51 AoN.DimSum wrote: i sent u guys the rutgers coordinator!!!!! i dont remember who it is, let me look it up.
Found it. Dunno, sometimes gmail doesn't send the cstarleague emails to me properly . I think I'm gonna start checking directly.
Note to all coordinators/players: I'm human - be sure to inform me of any errors/updates for your team's info. Especially if you're missing!
Well, it is THE Ohio State University. (If you said Ohio State University to me I would honestly be confused for a second, it sounds really weird after living in Ohio for so long.)
Should I alphabetize you guys according to the "The" as well? I'll fix it in a second though =P. That's so weird. THE Ohio State University? Is there another one or something? It's not even like.. The blah of something.
I need to stop posting less so I don't get screwed for 2000 posts.
EDIT to answer you - who told you about the super secret switch? =X. It was a secret for a reason! And more lol at THE.
Yeah, Ohio State University is across the street, but no one really knows much about it. I also heard about a super secret switch back to BW for CSL season 4. ;D
I always was amused by how passionately certain alumni would correct you if you forgot the "The". I like my school and all but... You can leave it off if you want, I know someone removed it halfway through last season. It's definitely easier to find us in the O's.
On August 17 2010 08:51 AoN.DimSum wrote: i sent u guys the rutgers coordinator!!!!! i dont remember who it is, let me look it up.
Found it. Dunno, sometimes gmail doesn't send the cstarleague emails to me properly . I think I'm gonna start checking directly.
Note to all coordinators/players:I'm human - be sure to inform me of any errors/updates for your team's info. Especially if you're missing!
I AM CSL ADMIN. I AM GOD. I MAKE NO MISTAKES.
lol I was joking >>
On August 17 2010 09:50 holy_war wrote: @CSL admins: it's not "University of Texas A&M" but Texas A&M University. I know its a small thing, but would you mind changing it?
On August 18 2010 04:16 Reversal wrote: well im going their and im a freshman i suck at sc2 but this could be fun. hopfully some one picks it up for u of i
there is always one or "nerd places" in every university i hv been through (3 till now). mostly those related to math and computer science or software club. Go there and pick up 5 guys, make sure you train them into diamond (take 2 weeks aprox. for me to get my frnd from gold) and sign up =)
On August 18 2010 04:53 NB wrote: personally i think UofT is unfair... the university has facilities in 3 DIFFERENT CITIES. 3 CAMPUSes!!!
they should be split in to individual campus team more than gather up.... but what ever, personal thought =P
UofT last season did decent tough =D
Hey, that other school in NJ that's not Princeton has facilities all over north Jersey. In fact, none of the teammates had actually met each other personally until they came to Princeton for our match.
On the other hand, we at princeton have such a small campus that we see each other pretty much every day. Hell, Darththienan and Hazelynut were pretty much living in the same damn room (owned by neither) for about 4 months.
It shouldn't be split by how many campuses it has lol, since the # of campus's isn't a direct correlation of # of students. Example, ohio state has like the most undergrads in one campus in the country, and they'll be up against much much smaller colleges in ionno......somewhere in canada or something.
On August 18 2010 08:47 ZlaSHeR wrote: It shouldn't be split by how many campuses it has lol, since the # of campus's isn't a direct correlation of # of students. Example, ohio state has like the most undergrads in one campus in the country, and they'll be up against much much smaller colleges in ionno......somewhere in canada or something.
The UofT has the most students of any university in NA but yeah, it'd be hard to coordinate from SG campus to SC or MS so I don't see it as a problem.
On August 18 2010 04:53 NB wrote: personally i think UofT is unfair... the university has facilities in 3 DIFFERENT CITIES. 3 CAMPUSes!!!
they should be split in to individual campus team more than gather up.... but what ever, personal thought =P
UofT last season did decent tough =D
Hey, that other school in NJ that's not Princeton has facilities all over north Jersey. In fact, none of the teammates had actually met each other personally until they came to Princeton for our match.
On the other hand, we at princeton have such a small campus that we see each other pretty much every day. Hell, Darththienan and Hazelynut were pretty much living in the same damn room (owned by neither) for about 4 months.
no we all are from the same campus. lol But it is true for the princeton v rutgers match we never met up before.
University of Illinois – No current coordinator/team. (Recommendation negative)
What does this mean?
It means the past coordinator declined to continue, and his recommendation for successor also declined. And no one has contacted us to replace ^^.
On August 18 2010 04:16 Reversal wrote: well im going their and im a freshman i suck at sc2 but this could be fun. hopfully some one picks it up for u of i
On August 18 2010 04:53 NB wrote: personally i think UofT is unfair... the university has facilities in 3 DIFFERENT CITIES. 3 CAMPUSes!!!
they should be split in to individual campus team more than gather up.... but what ever, personal thought =P
UofT last season did decent tough =D
Hey, that other school in NJ that's not Princeton has facilities all over north Jersey. In fact, none of the teammates had actually met each other personally until they came to Princeton for our match.
On the other hand, we at princeton have such a small campus that we see each other pretty much every day. Hell, Darththienan and Hazelynut were pretty much living in the same damn room (owned by neither) for about 4 months.
lolz. Good times. I slept in everyone's room man. Remember that time I "slept" in yours? Except I actually just played Starcraft the whole time while you slept. lolol.
On August 18 2010 09:21 Phelix wrote: Please adopt the race rule of 1 Random per week so that I can finally get a RvR matchup for once.
haha. If only we were legit enough to have a race rule at all.
On August 16 2010 17:56 NB wrote: UW, are we contacting by that email list or what? ...
You should specify which UW . Though I guess people that know you will know?
well im from canada.... thats should be clear >.<... U waterloo hwaiting!!!
sad how most of our members are on workterm or vacation and not on campus atm... the line up might be late but would be really strong.
wondering if we can recuit HuK and Silver though? they dont go to our school but they live near by the area and no school near by except us is participating.
Well if you look at the title, it's called a Collegiate Starcraft League for a reason. It's not a "recruit very good players who live around the school." I find it ridiculous that you are actually wondering that lol. It wouldn't even feel good to win like that.
Yeah so I didn't see Ryerson University anywhere around here so I decided to try to start a team. Not sure if there was a team last year or not, but if there was someone let me know :O
If not, and you go to Ryerson and are interested in playing, shoot me a PM or something.
I'm pretty sure Ryerson was in the CSL season 3. for some random reason, the admins put all the school near the ohio area (including cmu which is in pittsburgh) together with the canadians last season =/
On August 19 2010 00:54 Chaotic_flare wrote: I'm pretty sure Ryerson was in the CSL season 3. for some random reason, the admins put all the school near the ohio area (including cmu which is in pittsburgh) together with the canadians last season =/
Does anyone know who the coordinator was so that I can get in touch with them?
On August 19 2010 00:34 Shifft wrote: Yeah so I didn't see Ryerson University anywhere around here so I decided to try to start a team. Not sure if there was a team last year or not, but if there was someone let me know :O
If not, and you go to Ryerson and are interested in playing, shoot me a PM or something.
On August 19 2010 00:54 Chaotic_flare wrote: I'm pretty sure Ryerson was in the CSL season 3. for some random reason, the admins put all the school near the ohio area (including cmu which is in pittsburgh) together with the canadians last season =/
Ehh. We did things geographically (vertically) for the most part, with very little thought toward skill balance. Ohio is right here Toronto area isn't it?
On August 19 2010 01:49 Xeris wrote: btw mark, who's that student at my school? was that you ? because if so, I'd give that banner a C- at best... ^_^
=X. I also saved it as a jpg instead of png so the qualitys bad. I just figured out that day how to use a paint brush again. Before I always used the spray paint because they changed the paint brush icon and I was like... where is it?? for the longest time. lol.
Edit: YO I JUST REMEMBERED THIS IS AN ART SCHOOL. I should get an A for effort.
On August 19 2010 00:34 Shifft wrote: Yeah so I didn't see Ryerson University anywhere around here so I decided to try to start a team. Not sure if there was a team last year or not, but if there was someone let me know :O
If not, and you go to Ryerson and are interested in playing, shoot me a PM or something.
On August 19 2010 00:54 Chaotic_flare wrote: I'm pretty sure Ryerson was in the CSL season 3. for some random reason, the admins put all the school near the ohio area (including cmu which is in pittsburgh) together with the canadians last season =/
Ehh. We did things geographically (vertically) for the most part, with very little thought toward skill balance. Ohio is right here Toronto area isn't it?
On August 19 2010 00:34 Shifft wrote: Yeah so I didn't see Ryerson University anywhere around here so I decided to try to start a team. Not sure if there was a team last year or not, but if there was someone let me know :O
If not, and you go to Ryerson and are interested in playing, shoot me a PM or something.
On August 19 2010 00:54 Chaotic_flare wrote: I'm pretty sure Ryerson was in the CSL season 3. for some random reason, the admins put all the school near the ohio area (including cmu which is in pittsburgh) together with the canadians last season =/
Ehh. We did things geographically (vertically) for the most part, with very little thought toward skill balance. Ohio is right here Toronto area isn't it?
On August 19 2010 07:12 blabber wrote: if you guys want a lot of publicity, maybe someone can convince hdstarcraft and/or husky to make a video about CSL
Just wanted to throw out there that "Kvz", a highly-ranked zerg player is from UCSD. I don't think he's posted or contacted anyone from the damn good UCSD team about a tryout.
On August 19 2010 10:50 trancey wrote: Just wanted to throw out there that "Kvz", a highly-ranked zerg player is from UCSD. I don't think he's posted or contacted anyone from the damn good UCSD team about a tryout.
On August 19 2010 13:31 Atrioc wrote: ASU get ready to dominate this year ok. We have a huge number of untapped nerds that will be reactivated now that SC2 is out.
If you tap them, make sure you use them all or else you'll get mana burn.
On August 19 2010 13:31 Atrioc wrote: ASU get ready to dominate this year ok. We have a huge number of untapped nerds that will be reactivated now that SC2 is out.
If you tap them, make sure you use them all or else you'll get mana burn.
On August 19 2010 13:31 Atrioc wrote: ASU get ready to dominate this year ok. We have a huge number of untapped nerds that will be reactivated now that SC2 is out.
If you tap them, make sure you use them all or else you'll get mana burn.
is there a place where we can make suggestions to CSL? just curious. I was wondering how divisions are made. Are they random after u split east and west?
On August 20 2010 23:32 Monkeyboi2k3 wrote: is there a place where we can make suggestions to CSL? just curious. I was wondering how divisions are made. Are they random after u split east and west?
I think that divisions should somewhat resemble Athletic divisions. I'm not saying that all schools in a say the Pac-10 should all be in one division, its just that some huge school vs school rivalries should be considered. For example, i think that duke, maryland, and unc should be in the same division, if they all have teams, just because those acc rivalries are intense in any sport. I think it would add more hype and epicness to the CSL
On August 21 2010 00:34 Monkeyboi2k3 wrote: Just curious for opinions from people here,
I think that divisions should somewhat resemble Athletic divisions. I'm not saying that all schools in a say the Pac-10 should all be in one division, its just that some huge school vs school rivalries should be considered. For example, i think that duke, maryland, and unc should be in the same division, if they all have teams, just because those acc rivalries are intense in any sport. I think it would add more hype and epicness to the CSL
I'm a high school senior right now, and my plan is to apply for Columbia University early this November, but the lack of CSL scene there makes me sad. T_T
If you don't think there's a "CSL scene" at your school, MAKE ONE. It'll be much easier this year, now that sc2 is huge. I managed to pull it off at a tiny school last year with bw, and we even finished midway through our division.
That said, I'm not sure if Mount Allison will compete this year. Shane seems disinterested in sc2, but I'll try to find someone else to coordinate. I'll be playing for Dalhousie this year
On August 21 2010 00:34 Monkeyboi2k3 wrote: Just curious for opinions from people here,
I think that divisions should somewhat resemble Athletic divisions. I'm not saying that all schools in a say the Pac-10 should all be in one division, its just that some huge school vs school rivalries should be considered. For example, i think that duke, maryland, and unc should be in the same division, if they all have teams, just because those acc rivalries are intense in any sport. I think it would add more hype and epicness to the CSL
Last year's Big Ten was all in West 1.
Yeah, we did that last season on purpose I'm pretty sure ^^.
On August 21 2010 02:56 Animostas wrote: I'm a high school senior right now, and my plan is to apply for Columbia University early this November, but the lack of CSL scene there makes me sad. T_T
It's not huge, but I think there's some interest - Maybe by the time you get there, there'll be lots of people . Alternatively, just come to Princeton.
On August 19 2010 07:06 Monkeyboi2k3 wrote: wheres university of michigan on here??
We'll be here, or at least we should be at least. We were in CSL last few seasons, so I don't see why this one would be any different. I just don't think our coordinator registered us yet ^_^
On August 24 2010 04:15 rauk wrote: did anyone make a post on bnet forums? im sure there are a ton of college players who have never heard of TL but post on bnet and would love to play.
On August 19 2010 07:06 Monkeyboi2k3 wrote: wheres university of michigan on here??
We'll be here, or at least we should be at least. We were in CSL last few seasons, so I don't see why this one would be any different. I just don't think our coordinator registered us yet ^_^
That's odd, Nubster agreed to coordinate and was listed as such on the Cstarleague page:
On August 24 2010 04:15 rauk wrote: did anyone make a post on bnet forums? im sure there are a ton of college players who have never heard of TL but post on bnet and would love to play.
That's a good point. We haven't (as far as I know) posted there, because none of us ever visit those forums. Same with the other sites (though we did post on SC2GG/GG.net last year). I'll see what we can do about that ^^.
On August 19 2010 07:06 Monkeyboi2k3 wrote: wheres university of michigan on here??
We'll be here, or at least we should be at least. We were in CSL last few seasons, so I don't see why this one would be any different. I just don't think our coordinator registered us yet ^_^
That's odd, Nubster agreed to coordinate and was listed as such on the Cstarleague page:
Maybe you (allowicious) were looking at the thread section? Those are just TL threads, the list of schools is the important section - UMich has been in there since the start =D.
Note to all players/coordinators: Less than a day until registration begins . If your school doesn't have a contact/isn't on that list, make sure you let me know ASAP! I've updated the list as of this post, so make sure it's accurate.
On August 24 2010 04:15 rauk wrote: did anyone make a post on bnet forums? im sure there are a ton of college players who have never heard of TL but post on bnet and would love to play.
That's a good point. We haven't (as far as I know) posted there, because none of us ever visit those forums. Same with the other sites (though we did post on SC2GG/GG.net last year). I'll see what we can do about that ^^.
On August 19 2010 07:06 Monkeyboi2k3 wrote: wheres university of michigan on here??
We'll be here, or at least we should be at least. We were in CSL last few seasons, so I don't see why this one would be any different. I just don't think our coordinator registered us yet ^_^
That's odd, Nubster agreed to coordinate and was listed as such on the Cstarleague page:
Maybe you (allowicious) were looking at the thread section? Those are just TL threads, the list of schools is the important section - UMich has been in there since the start =D.
Note to all players/coordinators: Less than a day until registration begins . If your school doesn't have a contact/isn't on that list, make sure you let me know ASAP! I've updated the list as of this post, so make sure it's accurate.
also you could probably ask blizz if they could put CSL in the community news on bnet. it'd be a long shot, but so awesome if they did.
yo jw, should the UC's put "UC Riverside" and "UC Berkeley" as the official name or do you want us to list the whole thing like University of California, Riverside and all that. i just want to do it the same way all the other UC's are so we can all look perty together
On August 26 2010 00:47 JiYan wrote: yo jw, should the UC's put "UC Riverside" and "UC Berkeley" as the official name or do you want us to list the whole thing like University of California, Riverside and all that. i just want to do it the same way all the other UC's are so we can all look perty together
Well, Xeris took the initiative and did UC... personally I prefer full names though =P.
On August 26 2010 00:47 JiYan wrote: yo jw, should the UC's put "UC Riverside" and "UC Berkeley" as the official name or do you want us to list the whole thing like University of California, Riverside and all that. i just want to do it the same way all the other UC's are so we can all look perty together
Well, Xeris took the initiative and did UC... personally I prefer full names though =P.
On August 26 2010 01:29 Impervious wrote: I don't actually have SC2 yet..... But I'll still coordinate. I need to bypass filling out my player profile for the moment.....
From the news post on the CSL site: If you do not own a Battle.net character, fill in arbitrary information for now - you can always update your information at a later time.
hmm, my university isnt listed, but there is one that has very close ties to it, would i be aligned with University of Waterloo, or would i need to create a new organization for Wilfred Laurier University?
On August 26 2010 03:53 Holcan wrote: hmm, my university isnt listed, but there is one that has very close ties to it, would i be aligned with University of Waterloo, or would i need to create a new organization for Wilfred Laurier University?
lololol, same question! i heard silver is a grad in laurier xD... would love to have him in our team
On August 26 2010 03:53 Holcan wrote: hmm, my university isnt listed, but there is one that has very close ties to it, would i be aligned with University of Waterloo, or would i need to create a new organization for Wilfred Laurier University?
lololol, same question! i heard silver is a grad in laurier xD... would love to have him in our team
well they are literally right across the street, and some courses can be tied into the other university, so i dont see why they would force us to make two teams in a city with 200,000 people.
On August 26 2010 03:53 Holcan wrote: hmm, my university isnt listed, but there is one that has very close ties to it, would i be aligned with University of Waterloo, or would i need to create a new organization for Wilfred Laurier University?
lololol, same question! i heard silver is a grad in laurier xD... would love to have him in our team
well they are literally right across the street, and some courses can be tied into the other university, so i dont see why they would force us to make two teams in a city with 200,000 people.
to be honest, half of my... no 3/4 in my advance math courses in waterloo are double degree kids. 2 campus are on the same street and people normally go to both. As a normal waterloo student, I am allowed to take courses in laurier so i dont think we have any reason not to join 2 school together.
more over, i believe there is not enough nerds in laurier to start a team
Carleton, U of Ottawa, and Algonquin are within walking distances of each other here in Ottawa, and we had to form separate teams (which led to Algonquin not being able to field a team). There are even many opportunities to take courses at the other schools (I'm looking into it myself). Not only that, but we had a player that had a joint program between UO and Carleton (good thing he chose Ottawa, rather than that third-rate university he's also attending).
I'd be all up for being able to combine, but it's up to the admins..... Although it shouldn't be too hard to get a few people who play SC2 - it's everywhere atm.....
On August 26 2010 04:23 Impervious wrote: Carleton, U of Ottawa, and Algonquin are within walking distances of each other here in Ottawa, and we had to form separate teams (which led to Algonquin not being able to field a team). There are even many opportunities to take courses at the other schools (I'm looking into it myself). Not only that, but we had a player that had a joint program between UO and Carleton (good thing he chose Ottawa, rather than that third-rate university he's also attending).
I'd be all up for being able to combine, but it's up to the admins..... Although it shouldn't be too hard to get a few people who play SC2 - it's everywhere atm.....
email the cstarleague gmail account and describe your situation. we've allowed a couple of super small schools with multiple campuses combine, but if you have >4-5k undergrad we usually don't allow it.
On August 26 2010 04:23 Impervious wrote: Carleton, U of Ottawa, and Algonquin are within walking distances of each other here in Ottawa, and we had to form separate teams (which led to Algonquin not being able to field a team). There are even many opportunities to take courses at the other schools (I'm looking into it myself). Not only that, but we had a player that had a joint program between UO and Carleton (good thing he chose Ottawa, rather than that third-rate university he's also attending).
I'd be all up for being able to combine, but it's up to the admins..... Although it shouldn't be too hard to get a few people who play SC2 - it's everywhere atm.....
They say that over at Carleton the profs are really swell You ask hem just one question and they tell you to go to hell
They say that over at Carleton the classes are a blast But even when you graduate, you'll still be pumping gas
They say that over at Carleton the mattresses are firm You lift the mattress corner and you find the handmade sperm
They say that over at Carleton the chick are really hot But when you wake up in the morning you've got to get your shots
They say that over at Carleton the guys have lots of class But stop, wait, dont turn around, they'll fuck you in the ass
They say that over at Carleton they're trying to improve Just ask their friends at McLeans, they're #42*
I'm an asshole, I'm an asshole I'm an asshole through and through But I'd rather be an asshole than to go to Carleton U
There's a hole in the city and its name is Carleton U If you're dumb and you're stupid than it's the place for you So if your GPA is lower than 1.2 Then you'll get a big warm welcome from last chance U
Weird glitch in the system where the same school cna be registered multiple times.
Me and my two teammates all signed up and it made us into 3 teams , team 9, 27, and 30 by the registry order, all of us go to the same school (George Washington University) in Washington, DC.
On August 26 2010 11:50 ZlaSHeR wrote: Weird glitch in the system where the same school cna be registered multiple times.
Me and my two teammates all signed up and it made us into 3 teams , team 9, 27, and 30 by the registry order, all of us go to the same school (George Washington University) in Washington, DC.
You're supposed to join the other team, not make a new one ^_^. See my latest newspost, but you're not going to be able to do anything for another few hours.
All ladder maps EXCEPT Blistering Sands, Steppes of War, and Kulas.
Include the blizzard map Crossfire, and a couple Iccup maps. Devotion seems good and Fighting Spirit is always a winner in my opinion.
EDIT: If anybody from the University of Colorado wants to form a CSL team, PM me! I know there are a couple of players here. I think Jonoman92 goes to CU Denver (might be wrong... maybe he'd be willing to play for us anyway because he's super dank).
On August 26 2010 15:31 Meta wrote: My thoughts on map pool:
All ladder maps EXCEPT Blistering Sands, Steppes of War, and Kulas.
Include the blizzard map Crossfire, and a couple Iccup maps. Devotion seems good and Fighting Spirit is always a winner in my opinion.
EDIT: If anybody from the University of Colorado wants to form a CSL team, PM me! I know there are a couple of players here. I think Jonoman92 goes to CU Denver (might be wrong... maybe he'd be willing to play for us anyway because he's super dank).
Nah man. Metalopolis 5 games in a row. That way, no one can blame their losses on the map and less practice time, since everyone just needs to train one map!
On August 26 2010 15:31 Meta wrote: My thoughts on map pool:
All ladder maps EXCEPT Blistering Sands, Steppes of War, and Kulas.
Include the blizzard map Crossfire, and a couple Iccup maps. Devotion seems good and Fighting Spirit is always a winner in my opinion.
EDIT: If anybody from the University of Colorado wants to form a CSL team, PM me! I know there are a couple of players here. I think Jonoman92 goes to CU Denver (might be wrong... maybe he'd be willing to play for us anyway because he's super dank).
are you serious???? those 3 are so good though!
i would remove Desert oasis FIRST, as well as most players on the ladder. 2nd and 3rd would be the 2 new maps, they have stupid open nature which discourage macro games :>
On August 26 2010 15:31 Meta wrote: My thoughts on map pool:
All ladder maps EXCEPT Blistering Sands, Steppes of War, and Kulas.
Include the blizzard map Crossfire, and a couple Iccup maps. Devotion seems good and Fighting Spirit is always a winner in my opinion.
EDIT: If anybody from the University of Colorado wants to form a CSL team, PM me! I know there are a couple of players here. I think Jonoman92 goes to CU Denver (might be wrong... maybe he'd be willing to play for us anyway because he's super dank).
are you serious???? those 3 are so good though!
i would remove Desert oasis FIRST, as well as most players on the ladder. 2nd and 3rd would be the 2 new maps, they have stupid open nature which discourage macro games :>
Desert oasis is played so little anyways, having it in the map rotation would make for, at the very least, an interesting set each match. Widen our horizons, or something like that...
I hate desert oasis. I usually just cheese it so I can move on with my life. Some of the ICCup maps would be nice for sure. Kulas is a possible ban imo, but Steppes of War and Blistering Sands are great maps imo.
To clarify: we're not having an "Ace" match anymore. Instead, it's four 1v1s (four different people for each) and one 2v2 (both can be repeats, optional of course).
On August 27 2010 11:32 DarthThienAn wrote: To clarify: we're not having an "Ace" match anymore. Instead, it's four 1v1s (four different people for each) and one 2v2 (both can be repeats, optional of course).
oh what?????????? so we have to train 2v2 as well? T__T bring ace back pleaseeeeeeeeeeee... 2v2 is so weird though
Well, I think this change is to allow other schools who don't have big name players to have a chance to get to the Playoffs, and not just rely on a superstar player who just happens to be in the school to get 2 out of the 3 wins in a match.
2v2s are going to be interesting this year. Will 2 of the same race be allowed?
On August 27 2010 14:01 Phelix wrote: Well, I think this change is to allow other schools who don't have big name players to have a chance to get to the Playoffs, and not just rely on a superstar player who just happens to be in the school to get 2 out of the 3 wins in a match.
2v2s are going to be interesting this year. Will 2 of the same race be allowed?
Nope.
On August 27 2010 14:28 ZlaSHeR wrote: It also allows for more teams to be signed up who only have 4 man lineups instead of needing 5. It can make a difference for small schools.
On August 27 2010 15:03 blabber wrote: ace matches are so exciting though! Remember Jaeyun vs Nony?
Everyone knew it would be Jaeyun and Nony either way O_O!
No aces means more focus on depth, less burden on teams, and 2v2, aces mean drama and hype with mvp/ace players bringing home the victory. We were deciding on this a while ago, and thought that it would be nicer to have the regular season be 4 1v1s / 1 2v2 while playoffs re-introduce the ace mechanism. If the general consensus really prefers the drama of an ace game throughout regular season too, we can see about making changes. Otherwise, assume this format.
so why dont we just put every school into a FFA BGH for fast....
please understand that we want to take CSL as PL in NA, how about make winner bracket and loser bracket, loser use 2v2 and winner use ace?
Or using ace or 2v2 is decided between 2 schools, if disagree 2v2 auto?... Please dont remove ace completely, the balance in sc2 is mostly made for 1v1, not 2v2 =.=
I don't see why you all are dieing for ace's though, the idea of them in an open league like CSL just begs for teams with one superstar pro-caliber player a la Nony, qxc, etc. to win everything. This doesn't seem like a bad change at all...
well I guess it's gonna make for more high level 2v2s since every team is gonna be sending their best players for the 2v2 (along with 1v1)... that should be cool ^_^
i dont know, 2v2 is a completely different game to me. especially when now you can share control + resources between allies, its even MORE complicated....
On August 27 2010 15:44 NB wrote: i dont know, 2v2 is a completely different game to me. especially when now you can share control + resources between allies, its even MORE complicated....
Sharing control doesn't really come into play in my experience... but I can definitely see some abusive strategy involving sharing resources (ex. Terran and their MULEs just feed the ally)
On August 27 2010 15:22 ZlaSHeR wrote: I don't see why you all are dieing for ace's though, the idea of them in an open league like CSL just begs for teams with one superstar pro-caliber player a la Nony, qxc, etc. to win everything. This doesn't seem like a bad change at all...
instead of teams sending their best players for the normal 1v1 and ace, they're just going to send them for the normal 1v1 and the 2v2
I don't think that's the reason for the change anyway
The 1v1 players being able to play in the 2v2 is interesting...i can understand removal of ACE but having the ACE play in 2v2s is interesting... I would probably prefer 6 unique players although that would be a bigger burden on small teams to gather players...
I would definitely prefer having a 2v2 though...just then on unique thing is kinda weird...
On August 27 2010 15:18 NB wrote: so why dont we just put every school into a FFA BGH for fast....
please understand that we want to take CSL as PL in NA, how about make winner bracket and loser bracket, loser use 2v2 and winner use ace?
Or using ace or 2v2 is decided between 2 schools, if disagree 2v2 auto?... Please dont remove ace completely, the balance in sc2 is mostly made for 1v1, not 2v2 =.=
Hey, given that CSL tries (or tried) to model itself off of the Korean SC:BW scene, I can understand why you wouldn't want 2v2 or to get rid of ace, but after three seasons of play, certain issues have simply shown that we cannot keep up with the Korean league.
In my opinion, this is mostly because the Korean Proleague is a professional league. The expectations of the players allow for an ace style match, as any player is potentially capable of winning the final match, making it a more suspenseful and evenly matched game. On the other hand, in CSL, the ACE usually consists of a very predictable match up between the two very best players, or allows with single good players to carry them on to victory.
Admitting, coming from Princeton, we relied heavily upon [pton]zchen to win two of our three games. So we didn't really need a base of good players , but instead, we could rely on a single "super" player who could carry us. If we remove the ace and add 2v2, it would at least add some flavor or at least opportunity for the other team to beat out the occasional "super" players.
Also, you gotta keep in mind, this isn't SC:BW, where the only viable 2v2 strat is to go fast lings/lots and rush the other player. Even though the current "strong" strat is now reaper/ling, there is still plenty of strategy involved. Having played plenty of 2v2 games, I find that many of the games don't simply become a double player elimination, semi-glorified 1v1 matches, but instead requires a lot more thought and cooperation. In fact, the new team maps alone, in which teams are given common bases, ensure that games don't necessarily become cheese fests and give a chance for more macro orientated games.
Lastly, CSL has shown in the past that it is neither stubborn nor blind to public opinion. If the currently proposed system fails, they'll be sure to fix it, if not immediately than at least before the start of the next season. If it is truly awful, the feel free to come back with all your "told you so's" and what not, but until then, give CSL a chance to work with a new game, since this will be the first SC2 season.
On August 27 2010 15:18 NB wrote: so why dont we just put every school into a FFA BGH for fast....
please understand that we want to take CSL as PL in NA, how about make winner bracket and loser bracket, loser use 2v2 and winner use ace?
Or using ace or 2v2 is decided between 2 schools, if disagree 2v2 auto?... Please dont remove ace completely, the balance in sc2 is mostly made for 1v1, not 2v2 =.=
Hey, given that CSL tries (or tried) to model itself off of the Korean SC:BW scene, I can understand why you wouldn't want 2v2 or to get rid of ace, but after three seasons of play, certain issues have simply shown that we cannot keep up with the Korean league.
In my opinion, this is mostly because the Korean Proleague is a professional league. The expectations of the players allow for an ace style match, as any player is potentially capable of winning the final match, making it a more suspenseful and evenly matched game. On the other hand, in CSL, the ACE usually consists of a very predictable match up between the two very best players, or allows with single good players to carry them on to victory.
Admitting, coming from Princeton, we relied heavily upon [pton]zchen to win two of our three games. So we didn't really need a base of good players , but instead, we could rely on a single "super" player who could carry us. If we remove the ace and add 2v2, it would at least add some flavor or at least opportunity for the other team to beat out the occasional "super" players.
Also, you gotta keep in mind, this isn't SC:BW, where the only viable 2v2 strat is to go fast lings/lots and rush the other player. Even though the current "strong" strat is now reaper/ling, there is still plenty of strategy involved. Having played plenty of 2v2 games, I find that many of the games don't simply become a double player elimination, semi-glorified 1v1 matches, but instead requires a lot more thought and cooperation. In fact, the new team maps alone, in which teams are given common bases, ensure that games don't necessarily become cheese fests and give a chance for more macro orientated games.
Lastly, CSL has shown in the past that it is neither stubborn nor blind to public opinion. If the currently proposed system fails, they'll be sure to fix it, if not immediately than at least before the start of the next season. If it is truly awful, the feel free to come back with all your "told you so's" and what not, but until then, give CSL a chance to work with a new game, since this will be the first SC2 season.
edit: fixed grammar stuff
well if you look at past seasons, you'll see that teams with depth outperform teams that have just the one super player. Last season we saw UCSD beat Duke who has Nony while UCSD has relative nobodies. Same thing with Waterloo. Harvey Mudd who had qxc who's like B level didn't even make the playoffs (neither did UC Riverside who had Dino). My team (UC Irvine who had no one above C+) did very well in the past seasons because we have solid depth
On August 27 2010 15:18 NB wrote: so why dont we just put every school into a FFA BGH for fast....
please understand that we want to take CSL as PL in NA, how about make winner bracket and loser bracket, loser use 2v2 and winner use ace?
Or using ace or 2v2 is decided between 2 schools, if disagree 2v2 auto?... Please dont remove ace completely, the balance in sc2 is mostly made for 1v1, not 2v2 =.=
Hey, given that CSL tries (or tried) to model itself off of the Korean SC:BW scene, I can understand why you wouldn't want 2v2 or to get rid of ace, but after three seasons of play, certain issues have simply shown that we cannot keep up with the Korean league.
In my opinion, this is mostly because the Korean Proleague is a professional league. The expectations of the players allow for an ace style match, as any player is potentially capable of winning the final match, making it a more suspenseful and evenly matched game. On the other hand, in CSL, the ACE usually consists of a very predictable match up between the two very best players, or allows with single good players to carry them on to victory.
Admitting, coming from Princeton, we relied heavily upon [pton]zchen to win two of our three games. So we didn't really need a base of good players , but instead, we could rely on a single "super" player who could carry us. If we remove the ace and add 2v2, it would at least add some flavor or at least opportunity for the other team to beat out the occasional "super" players.
Also, you gotta keep in mind, this isn't SC:BW, where the only viable 2v2 strat is to go fast lings/lots and rush the other player. Even though the current "strong" strat is now reaper/ling, there is still plenty of strategy involved. Having played plenty of 2v2 games, I find that many of the games don't simply become a double player elimination, semi-glorified 1v1 matches, but instead requires a lot more thought and cooperation. In fact, the new team maps alone, in which teams are given common bases, ensure that games don't necessarily become cheese fests and give a chance for more macro orientated games.
Lastly, CSL has shown in the past that it is neither stubborn nor blind to public opinion. If the currently proposed system fails, they'll be sure to fix it, if not immediately than at least before the start of the next season. If it is truly awful, the feel free to come back with all your "told you so's" and what not, but until then, give CSL a chance to work with a new game, since this will be the first SC2 season.
edit: fixed grammar stuff
well if you look at past seasons, you'll see that teams with depth outperform teams that have just the one super player. Last season we saw UCSD beat Duke who has Nony while UCSD has relative nobodies. Same thing with Waterloo. Harvey Mudd who had qxc who's like B level didn't even make the playoffs (neither did UC Riverside who had Dino). My team (UC Irvine who had no one above C+) did very well in the past seasons because we have solid depth
Definitely agree with you here. An ideal team is to have good depth, oppose to having one good player, and removing the ACE can support teams with good depth. I recall seeing the results of several matches, in which one single player would win the team two games, and the rest of the team simply had to muster up another one more, while the other team had to try and win the other three.
2v2 in bw was not just rushes. There were plenty of macro builds. It was just that it was a mirror mu most of the time with pz v pz and it was not popular to watch from what i recall.
All the foreign leagues like wgtcl and bwcl always had 2v2 so I think this is a good decision.
I never liked 2v2 in previous csl seasons because it was too hard to practice 2v2 with rutgers internet. We couldnt join each others games so we had to use hamachi for csl games. But in sc2, it should be fine.
On August 30 2010 08:17 Xeris wrote: no deadline... players can join throughout the season, but players added late (past some undecided point) won't be eligible for the playoffs.
i dont understand the reasoning for this rule. if a team finds out a really good player is at their school and they only then contact him and get him playing for them, why can't he play in the playoffs?
On August 30 2010 08:17 Xeris wrote: no deadline... players can join throughout the season, but players added late (past some undecided point) won't be eligible for the playoffs.
i dont understand the reasoning for this rule. if a team finds out a really good player is at their school and they only then contact him and get him playing for them, why can't he play in the playoffs?
it's kinda like a merc, I'll use an example from BW. let's say you're in a clan league with a 1k prize, and right before the final you just recruit Flash to play for you so you can win. obviously this isn't really fair to the competition, he's not really a part of the team, etc.
so on a similar note, someone who hasn't been with the team for the whole season can be thought of as a merc. "hey, you're really good at SC, play in the playoffs for my team..." - it just seems wrong.
On August 30 2010 08:17 Xeris wrote: no deadline... players can join throughout the season, but players added late (past some undecided point) won't be eligible for the playoffs.
i dont understand the reasoning for this rule. if a team finds out a really good player is at their school and they only then contact him and get him playing for them, why can't he play in the playoffs?
it's kinda like a merc, I'll use an example from BW. let's say you're in a clan league with a 1k prize, and right before the final you just recruit Flash to play for you so you can win. obviously this isn't really fair to the competition, he's not really a part of the team, etc.
so on a similar note, someone who hasn't been with the team for the whole season can be thought of as a merc. "hey, you're really good at SC, play in the playoffs for my team..." - it just seems wrong.
but he goes to the school and plays SC and so he IS part of the team... you can't hire people for CSL lol. And even if you could, it's like when KT bought ForGG last year (right before Winner's League playoffs): even though it backfired and he slumped horribly, it was allowed. This just seems like an arbitrary rule for something that doesn't really matter.
I think it's more like "oh we've played so hard the whole season to get to where we are blah blah blah... oh look we found an A level player, go win our playoff games for us even though you did nothing to get us here and we barely know you!"
I can see why they want to prevent this from happening even if I would do it myself if the rule isn't there
^ i think Ideas got his point a person who go to school and play sc should be able to join play off. more over the season will end b4 next semester start so there is no way a team can hired some one else to JOIN their school and join their. Its like STX has their right to put Tossgirl into PL but they just choose not to.
This also help schools to prepare some secret weapon :-j
On August 30 2010 15:19 NB wrote: ^ i think Ideas got his point a person who go to school and play sc should be able to join play off. more over the season will end b4 next semester start so there is no way a team can hired some one else to JOIN their school and join their. Its like STX has their right to put Tossgirl into PL but they just choose not to.
This also help schools to prepare some secret weapon :-j
I believe it's fine if the person is already on the roster.
LOL WE HAVE GIRL! I think you should use of the iCCup maps (go to Create game and search them up, they're pretty cool), instead of just always Blizzard maps.
On August 30 2010 15:24 TriniMasta wrote: LOL WE HAVE GIRL! I think you should use of the iCCup maps (go to Create game and search them up, they're pretty cool), instead of just always Blizzard maps.
yea using a 1-3 non-ladder maps in the CSL would be a GREAT way to promote community maps :D
On August 30 2010 15:17 blabber wrote: I think it's more like "oh we've played so hard the whole season to get to where we are blah blah blah... oh look we found an A level player, go win our playoff games for us even though you did nothing to get us here and we barely know you!"
I can see why they want to prevent this from happening even if I would do it myself if the rule isn't there
the only way I can see someone getting upset from this is that a team will perform better in the playoffs. but they already MADE the playoffs so it's not like some other more-deserving team should be there instead. It's like in mighty ducks 3 when Portman came in after the 2nd period during the JV-Varsity game: he was always part of the team but was only then able to play (in the CSL's case, anyone who plays SC at the school is part of the team, and is only able to play when the coordinator puts them on the roster/lineup).
On August 30 2010 15:17 blabber wrote: I think it's more like "oh we've played so hard the whole season to get to where we are blah blah blah... oh look we found an A level player, go win our playoff games for us even though you did nothing to get us here and we barely know you!"
I can see why they want to prevent this from happening even if I would do it myself if the rule isn't there
This is exactly right. Just because a guy plays SC and goes to your school doesn't mean he is necessarily part of the team. It's like if you have Joe, Bob, and Jimmy playing every regular season game, and they're C level players lets say.
Then you get to the semis and you find out that Jaeyun, Myung-Kim, and Yung-wha play SC and are A level players and they play all your playoff games. Then you basically throw all your other players who have been fighting for your school from the beginning under the bus because you found cool new players - that doesn't seem fair to them.
Secondly, it's bad for preparation, for example, a team would go study past replays or whatever to try and prepare for the match... if you use some unknown mercs (im just calling them mercs for the sake of argument), there can be no real way to prepare yourself and you're fighting in the dark.
Both of those present unfair opportunities, and is why that rule is in place.
On August 30 2010 15:17 blabber wrote: I think it's more like "oh we've played so hard the whole season to get to where we are blah blah blah... oh look we found an A level player, go win our playoff games for us even though you did nothing to get us here and we barely know you!"
I can see why they want to prevent this from happening even if I would do it myself if the rule isn't there
This is exactly right. Just because a guy plays SC and goes to your school doesn't mean he is necessarily part of the team. It's like if you have Joe, Bob, and Jimmy playing every regular season game, and they're C level players lets say.
Then you get to the semis and you find out that Jaeyun, Myung-Kim, and Yung-wha play SC and are A level players and they play all your playoff games. Then you basically throw all your other players who have been fighting for your school from the beginning under the bus because you found cool new players - that doesn't seem fair to them.
immoral? yes. but should a rule be built-in to prohibit it? I would say no. especially considering many teams (not just coordinators) would still want to use their best players possible all the time. I specifically remember having a conversation with my team at the beginning of seasons 1, 2, and 3 about whether we want to play seriously and only use our best players every match or just play for fun and rotate out the lineups all the time (so everyone can play equal amounts), every time it was an absolute majority vote for serious play(although at the end when we were guaranteed a playoffs spot we still let the B-team play some games lol). I'm not saying all players feel this way about CSL or even all team majorities do, but it still sucks to be limiting teams that get lucky so-to-speak and discover a good player late into the season.
Secondly, it's bad for preparation, for example, a team would go study past replays or whatever to try and prepare for the match... if you use some unknown mercs (im just calling them mercs for the sake of argument), there can be no real way to prepare yourself and you're fighting in the dark.
Both of those present unfair opportunities, and is why that rule is in place.
I see this as an actual strategy that a team can use. Hey, if I have masterasia on my team but no one knows just how good he actually is, and I decide to wait till the playoffs to use him, and I actually MAKE the playoffs, then that's just more power to me. I guess if it's just adding some A-level korean RIGHT at the beginning of the playoffs then that would kinda suck. Maybe the rule should just be that someone in the playoffs must play at least 1 game in the regular season or something if they were added late.
although really I doubt this will ever be the case for any team lol. realistically it will just stop 1 or 2 teams from being able to use 1 more decent/good player in the playoffs, even if that player had played a few matches for them in the regular season.
Michigan actually held back some of our best players just for the playoffs last season. We could have used them during the regular season, but since we wanted as many people to play as possible without actually losing any matches, we'd just have the best for potential ace where necessary.
Since the deadline for adding players was/is(?) so late anyway, I don't think it makes that much of a difference, practically.
Don't really have an argument here. If it was still BW, I would side with the "no mercs" argument more strongly because it's hard enough as it is to find players. But for SC2, it's new and popular enough to gather sufficient interest even from the beginning of the semester.
At any rate, what kind of players you start (if you have a large enough team) is something decided by team culture. Is it about the winning? If so, maybe you can send your best players every single set and win each match 3-0 every time, while everyone else just warms the bench. Is it about letting as many people as possible enjoy a "proleague" experience (while remaining competitive, of course)?
On August 30 2010 16:15 Funnytoss wrote: Michigan actually held back some of our best players just for the playoffs last season. We could have used them during the regular season, but since we wanted as many people to play as possible without actually losing any matches, we'd just have the best for potential ace where necessary.
Since the deadline for adding players was/is(?) so late anyway, I don't think it makes that much of a difference, practically.
Don't really have an argument here. If it was still BW, I would side with the "no mercs" argument more strongly because it's hard enough as it is to find players. But for SC2, it's new and popular enough to gather sufficient interest even from the beginning of the semester.
At any rate, what kind of players you start (if you have a large enough team) is something decided by team culture. Is it about the winning? If so, maybe you can send your best players every single set and win each match 3-0 every time, while everyone else just warms the bench. Is it about letting as many people as possible enjoy a "proleague" experience (while remaining competitive, of course)?
this is why no season will ever be as good as season 1, when being D+ meant you can have a 50% win ratio in the regular season lol
this is why no season will ever be as good as season 1, when being D+ meant you can have a 50% win ratio in the regular season lol
It's really division dependent, I think. Season 2 we were placed with Toronto and Waterloo... suffice to say, we missed the playoffs. OSU was also decently strong that year. Season 3... let's just say that we didn't actually need to use anyone above C-, and if we did it was pretty much for the lolz.
I still prefer the excitement of an ace match over a 2v2 match. Since 2v2's are completely different than 1v1's, the players who have to play in them have to take away practice time to learn another "game" so to speak. The idea of an ace match is to have the best from each school matched against eachother, so the games should always be great.
On August 30 2010 14:57 Solidus_315 wrote: so UC Berkeley is in this when Andrew Poon confirms? I would really love to participate
Andrew Poon has created a team on the website already, feel free to join up =p.
On August 30 2010 15:19 NB wrote: ^ i think Ideas got his point a person who go to school and play sc should be able to join play off. more over the season will end b4 next semester start so there is no way a team can hired some one else to JOIN their school and join their. Its like STX has their right to put Tossgirl into PL but they just choose not to.
This also help schools to prepare some secret weapon :-j
If you really want a "secret weapon," just have them be on your roster and don't send them out until playoffs or something. "Secret weapon" implies that you've known about the person since the beginning of the semester, in which case, it shouldn't be a problem. The discussion right now is about players who ARENT on the roster, and then suddenly get put on right before the playoffs or something.
If you're going to compare this to PL, PL has specific times that they can change their rosters, right? So someone who randomly walks in wouldn't be able to play for the team, unless they were the roster.
On August 30 2010 15:24 TriniMasta wrote: LOL WE HAVE GIRL! I think you should use of the iCCup maps (go to Create game and search them up, they're pretty cool), instead of just always Blizzard maps.
yea using a 1-3 non-ladder maps in the CSL would be a GREAT way to promote community maps :D
It's being considered ^^. Everyone else, feel free to speak up about map preferences. The staff will (kind of) take into account what you have to say .
On August 30 2010 16:21 Ideas wrote: this is why no season will ever be as good as season 1, when being D+ meant you can have a 50% win ratio in the regular season lol
It's a new game, this season might show some of that same bad-people-winning-ness =P.
My thoughts on what's currently being discussed: Player registration cutoff isn't going to be so early that a lot of schools miss out on new players. Most likely, it'll be mid-season, if not later. That said, I think that schools should be able to find enough players by then. In the rare case that a school stumbles upon an A level player or whatever right before the playoffs, then, assuming the team is already in the playoffs, they should have a decent chance in the playoffs anyway. Yes, they might lose at some point where that A level player could have made a difference, but really, I don't think I'd support that. If it really matters to you (you, speaking in general to coordinators), then just make sure you advertise your team well enough while you have the time. Plus, this is part of the reason why there are two seasons - new players that don't make the deadline can just join up a couple months after.
I will no longer be updating the pre-registration list of schools because... it is no longer pre-registration =D. If you have any questions about whether or not your school has a team in the CSL, first check the currently registered teams, then check that old list in the OP/this newspost, then - unless you don't want to coordinate - you can register your own team for your school ^^.
General tips: -If your school has already been registered, simply go the team page and click the "Join" option (while logged in on an account) to apply to be on that team. The coordinator will then accept/deny your request. -If your school is on the pre-registration list, but not currently registered, email us about it - the coordinator listed is probably just being lazy, and we'll send an(other) email to them telling them to hurry up. And then, we can also email you as soon as the team is registered ^^. -If your school is on neither list, then you can either email us, or just go right ahead and register a team (while logged in, top right "Team Registration"). If you don't want to coordinate, the best course of action from there is to either make a team anyways to find players and then convince them to coordinate, or make a blog/post/email people from your school to find others who are interested.
On another note:
Poll: What do you prefer for match format?
Five 1v1s, last one is an Ace (last season style) (83)
63%
Both: three 1v1s, a 2v2, and an Ace match (unique players for the non-Ace?) (30)
23%
Four 1v1s (unique players), with a 2v2 (whoever) (16)
12%
Don't care. (1)
1%
Other - specify in thread. (1)
1%
131 total votes
Your vote: What do you prefer for match format?
(Vote): Five 1v1s, last one is an Ace (last season style) (Vote): Four 1v1s (unique players), with a 2v2 (whoever) (Vote): Both: three 1v1s, a 2v2, and an Ace match (unique players for the non-Ace?) (Vote): Don't care. (Vote): Other - specify in thread.
Poll: Should new players (past X deadline) be allowed in the playoff?
Yes - as long as they join before the playoffs (45)
45%
Yes - provided they have played a match or two before the playoffs (21)
21%
Yes - regardless of when they join the team (including during playoffs) (17)
17%
No - once the CSL deadline for new players has passed, no deal (17)
17%
Other - specify in thread (0)
0%
100 total votes
Your vote: Should new players (past X deadline) be allowed in the playoff?
(Vote): Yes - regardless of when they join the team (including during playoffs) (Vote): Yes - as long as they join before the playoffs (Vote): Yes - provided they have played a match or two before the playoffs (Vote): No - once the CSL deadline for new players has passed, no deal (Vote): Other - specify in thread
Poll: What kind of map pool?
Some Blizzard, Some User (ie. ICCup) (55)
59%
Any Blizzard Ladder Maps (22)
23%
Run Ling Run (for all 5 sets) (7)
7%
All User Maps (ie. ICCup) (6)
6%
Certain Blizzard Maps (Specify) (4)
4%
Other - Specify in thread (0)
0%
94 total votes
Your vote: What kind of map pool?
(Vote): Any Blizzard Ladder Maps (Vote): Certain Blizzard Maps (Specify) (Vote): Some Blizzard, Some User (ie. ICCup) (Vote): All User Maps (ie. ICCup) (Vote): Run Ling Run (for all 5 sets) (Vote): Other - Specify in thread
edit: by community maps we mean in particular the maps made by the iccup map-making team. For sure they have at least one map that they think is ready for the big time
On September 01 2010 10:32 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: 3 1v1, 1 2v2, 1 1v1 Ace is best imo. I miss old Proleague style. 2v2s were so awesome ;;
that would work too. Were there problems during Season 1 with schools not finding 5 people to play each week?
I love this system a lot...problem is that most obsessors are voting in the polls and so they vote the 1v1 methods whereas the other members on teams are not stalking tl and whatnot...
I definitely want to see some non-blizzard maps. The only blizzard maps that would be permissible as being even close to balanced are Metalopolis and Scrap Station. I want to see some Iccup maps personally, they are so awesome and get no love from tournaments.
Cornell has a good deal of players who are really looking forward to 2v2. I think it could add a lot of flavor and excitement to matches and I hope the CSL goes for it.
we'll check these ones two, but head over to the site and vote there too! (more csl ppl likely to see it)
On a side note, please don't game any of the polls (Please do not vote more than once per poll). The result of voting is not final - we will be using your feedback to help when making our decision!
I'd like to see 2v2 in somehow, although I'm not sure how to do that as well as an ace, since it seems like an ace is something people look forward to (myself included).
On September 01 2010 23:28 Inkarnate wrote: Maybe Clan Match style to allow for all-kills :o
This is really bad because there will be large skill disparities in matches. In some matchups you'll just have the worse team throw out four players with no chance of ever winning ... which isn't necessarily that bad for those players because they lose a lot anyway--but the better team doesn't get much out of one guy noobstomping the whole match.
I'd vote for 3 1v1s, 1 2v2, and an ace match, but I'm not playing this season because I don't have time to set anything up at my school and it doesn't look like U of A is registered.
I wouldn't mind this if the 2v2 players could be repeats from the 1v1, then however you can have 1 player play 3 games. HMM, dunno.
Maybe Clan Match style to allow for all-kills :o
Nony imba, JF imba, Jaeyun imba... yeah, it's a cool idea but it basically narrows all matches down to "can our ace beat their ace" and all the other games are superfluous.
yeah teams should sign a contract or something saying that they won't drop out in the middle. I realize it's probably not going to do anything but teams still need to realize that joining this is a commitment that lasts months
season 1 and 2 we didn't seem to have any problems with drop-outs (maybe 1 or 2 each season). season 3 was plagued primarily by beta.
i think we'll end up doing something similar to season 2, where we sent out an email almost making people re-register / give a definite answer of commitment. it seemed to work, and most people understood the seriousness of actually participating in the league.
hope all the schools end up playing, though, cause this is pretty awesome:
On September 03 2010 11:01 hazelynut wrote: season 1 and 2 we didn't seem to have any problems with drop-outs (maybe 1 or 2 each season). season 3 was plagued primarily by beta.
i think we'll end up doing something similar to season 2, where we sent out an email almost making people re-register / give a definite answer of commitment. it seemed to work, and most people understood the seriousness of actually participating in the league.
hope all the schools end up playing, though, cause this is pretty awesome:
pittsburgh doesn't seem to be dotted =O where's CMU representation?
If I remember correctly, there was talk of changing the season's structure if we got over 100 teams. Any hints on how teams are going to be divided up? Like maybe Ohio not being a Western state?
On September 03 2010 11:56 hazelynut wrote: The structure still depends on what's divisible by what, but this season you probably won't be seeing geographic divisions.
Small site update: Added a history section with info from season 2+3 (still need to add season 1 data). Also added new team + player pages to pull old data.
If you are playing this season and played last season, but do not see data on your profile - PM me. I tried to merge your current profiles with your old ones on email, name, and ID data to the best of my ability - but I don't doubt that I missed someone along the way and you have two profiles
On September 04 2010 16:43 Kinky wrote: I'm just curious, is there an estimate to how long this season will last?
uhh, I can answer you with what last season was like - we had ~70 schools and did something like a 10 week regular season, a match each week unless you had a bye. Playoffs was 5-6 weeks, starting at a Ro"32", where 16 teams played for 8 spots and 8 teams were seeded into the Ro16 for being the top school in their division. May or may not have had a weekbreak before the finals I forget.
So that's a total of.. 16ish weeks? Which puts the finals around New Years/early January (Teams in the playoffs may have to play during winter break btw).
For this season, we're not sure about the schedule, because we don't know how many schools are registering yet. It's been a week and a half since registration opened, and we've got 112 schools now. If we decide to do two seasons this year as opposed to a year-long season, it will probably end late December/early January (regular season ends late November/early December).
Hope this answers your question - I can't really say more because we're trying to get a good count on the number of schools we have first, and then go from there to see what works.
UWaterloo will apply after the try out so our name not gona be on the list for long :D... For those new frosh (1st year) and/or new to our sc team, pm me and i will gladly give you information.
On September 05 2010 00:22 NB wrote: UWaterloo will apply after the try out so our name not gona be on the list for long :D... For those new frosh (1st year) and/or new to our sc team, pm me and i will gladly give you information.
I don't understand what that means... what try out? And why would UWaterloo apply to anything? Are you saying that Waterloo will register after it has tryouts to determines it's team? To register you don't need a set player list/roster, just the coordinator...
On September 05 2010 06:29 looknohands119 wrote: Might be a dumb question but, CSL is broodwar again this season right?
On August 16 2010 16:56 DarthThienAn wrote: Answers to your questions for those that were too lazy to read: 1) Starcraft 2 2) August 25 3) September 25 4) October 2 5) Map pool still being decided, feel free to post with your thoughts.
On September 05 2010 00:22 NB wrote: UWaterloo will apply after the try out so our name not gona be on the list for long :D... For those new frosh (1st year) and/or new to our sc team, pm me and i will gladly give you information.
I don't understand what that means... what try out? And why would UWaterloo apply to anything? Are you saying that Waterloo will register after it has tryouts to determines it's team? To register you don't need a set player list/roster, just the coordinator...
o.o
it has nothing related to CSL except Steve is being lazy :<.... jk.. you might wana email him to speed him up though... all im doing is spreading the news ... not deciding anything ^^
If it's October-May, there'll be more breaks and leniency for things like Thanksgiving, winter break, and Easter. We're definitely not running the season while everyone is gone caroling and doing other festivities.
On September 05 2010 17:44 NB wrote: oh wow, october to may? double length compare to last year =.=..... what if some one gona graduate in the middle way like NonY?...
You do bring up a good point BUT that just means Nony can't play anymore second half of the season will require roster changes if that happens. Can't be too hard to find one more player for your team if that happens But it would suck to lose your ace like that. but then again that requires the rest of your team to get better!
So I have a question...if we decide to do year long, what would breaking the regular season into 2 portions (rounds in PL) and the cumulative decide who goes to playoffs...maybe even have different types of play, like round 1 has 2v2 with lineup, round 2 has only starters announced and after that hidden or something like that...
On September 05 2010 18:49 ReketSomething wrote: So I have a question...if we decide to do year long, what would breaking the regular season into 2 portions (rounds in PL) and the cumulative decide who goes to playoffs...maybe even have different types of play, like round 1 has 2v2 with lineup, round 2 has only starters announced and after that hidden or something like that...
i think what we should do is use this season (the 1st sc2 season) to point out A league and B league, that will make things more interesting and lower the different in skill gap :D
I think right now the skill level for most players is fairly similar. So A/B leagues wouldn't be needed so much the round idea is interesting. I like hidden lineups after first game part for 2nd half ;D
On September 05 2010 18:49 ReketSomething wrote: So I have a question...if we decide to do year long, what would breaking the regular season into 2 portions (rounds in PL) and the cumulative decide who goes to playoffs...maybe even have different types of play, like round 1 has 2v2 with lineup, round 2 has only starters announced and after that hidden or something like that...
i think what we should do is use this season (the 1st sc2 season) to point out A league and B league, that will make things more interesting and lower the different in skill gap :D
Can you imagine teams like uvic or rutgers going to B league just to dominate..... (just randomly choosing teams...nothing on uvic or rutgers or anything...)
On September 05 2010 18:49 ReketSomething wrote: So I have a question...if we decide to do year long, what would breaking the regular season into 2 portions (rounds in PL) and the cumulative decide who goes to playoffs...maybe even have different types of play, like round 1 has 2v2 with lineup, round 2 has only starters announced and after that hidden or something like that...
i think what we should do is use this season (the 1st sc2 season) to point out A league and B league, that will make things more interesting and lower the different in skill gap :D
Can you imagine teams like uvic or rutgers going to B league just to dominate..... (just randomly choosing teams...nothing on uvic or rutgers or anything...)
nonono that's why he's saying this season we see how teams do then top teams go to A league and lower teams go to B league
On September 05 2010 18:49 ReketSomething wrote: So I have a question...if we decide to do year long, what would breaking the regular season into 2 portions (rounds in PL) and the cumulative decide who goes to playoffs...maybe even have different types of play, like round 1 has 2v2 with lineup, round 2 has only starters announced and after that hidden or something like that...
i think what we should do is use this season (the 1st sc2 season) to point out A league and B league, that will make things more interesting and lower the different in skill gap :D
Can you imagine teams like uvic or rutgers going to B league just to dominate..... (just randomly choosing teams...nothing on uvic or rutgers or anything...)
nonono that's why he's saying this season we see how teams do then top teams go to A league and lower teams go to B league
yeah, thats my point.... the size of this season is too big which gona cause lots of trouble later on... A league and B league are obviously needed.
ofcourse no team would like to stay in B league, do you want to stay in bronze to rape noob or stay in diamond to train with higher skill level? :D
On September 05 2010 18:49 ReketSomething wrote: So I have a question...if we decide to do year long, what would breaking the regular season into 2 portions (rounds in PL) and the cumulative decide who goes to playoffs...maybe even have different types of play, like round 1 has 2v2 with lineup, round 2 has only starters announced and after that hidden or something like that...
i think what we should do is use this season (the 1st sc2 season) to point out A league and B league, that will make things more interesting and lower the different in skill gap :D
Can you imagine teams like uvic or rutgers going to B league just to dominate..... (just randomly choosing teams...nothing on uvic or rutgers or anything...)
nonono that's why he's saying this season we see how teams do then top teams go to A league and lower teams go to B league
yeah, thats my point.... the size of this season is too big which gona cause lots of trouble later on... A league and B league are obviously needed.
ofcourse no team would like to stay in B league, do you want to stay in bronze to rape noob or stay in diamond to train with higher skill level? :D
Actually, I like placing into Bronze quite a bit. It's a great way to win without trying too hard.
the website is so FUCKING sexy, amazing work you guys
the only time I can see my players emails though is when I bring up the moderation tab when a new player registers, but I can't see them thru the "my team" tab, is their a way we can make that happen or am I dumb x.x
On September 07 2010 07:37 Sunyveil wrote: can we please, please have 2v2s this year >_<
or at least some way so that more people can play and it's not just the top 5-6 players again and again and again.
weird, before playoff, you should use who ever you got to test them all out... also ace in play off doesnt mean 1 pro vs 1 pro but sniper war, imagine NonY came out with his phoenix build and got snipe by some "nobody" make me smile :D
Answers to your questions for those that were too lazy to read: 1) Starcraft 2 2) August 25 3) September 25 4) October 2 5) Map pool still being decided, feel free to post with your thoughts.
On September 07 2010 07:37 Sunyveil wrote: can we please, please have 2v2s this year >_<
or at least some way so that more people can play and it's not just the top 5-6 players again and again and again.
weird, before playoff, you should use who ever you got to test them all out... also ace in play off doesnt mean 1 pro vs 1 pro but sniper war, imagine NonY came out with his phoenix build and got snipe by some "nobody" make me smile :D
Answers to your questions for those that were too lazy to read: 1) Starcraft 2 2) August 25 3) September 25 4) October 2 5) Map pool still being decided, feel free to post with your thoughts.
What's October 2?
Ah, that was the original "first match" date before we had so many teams ^^.
On September 07 2010 06:54 mOnion wrote: the website is so FUCKING sexy, amazing work you guys
the only time I can see my players emails though is when I bring up the moderation tab when a new player registers, but I can't see them thru the "my team" tab, is their a way we can make that happen or am I dumb x.x
mOnion, it's better this way because if it was under the "My Team" tab then you would be able to see other team's emails and it would be available publicly, which is not something they would want. Having it under "Manage" requires you to be logged in to see the emails
Answers to your questions for those that were too lazy to read: 1) Starcraft 2 2) August 25 3) September 25 4) October 2 5) Map pool still being decided, feel free to post with your thoughts.
What's October 2?
Ah, that was the original "first match" date before we had so many teams ^^.
On September 07 2010 06:54 mOnion wrote: the website is so FUCKING sexy, amazing work you guys
the only time I can see my players emails though is when I bring up the moderation tab when a new player registers, but I can't see them thru the "my team" tab, is their a way we can make that happen or am I dumb x.x
mOnion, it's better this way because if it was under the "My Team" tab then you would be able to see other team's emails and it would be available publicly, which is not something they would want. Having it under "Manage" requires you to be logged in to see the emails
oh holy shit you can get to the manage tab from my team @_@ thats what i was asking for hahahaha i'm retarded
On September 07 2010 06:54 mOnion wrote: the website is so FUCKING sexy, amazing work you guys
the only time I can see my players emails though is when I bring up the moderation tab when a new player registers, but I can't see them thru the "my team" tab, is their a way we can make that happen or am I dumb x.x
mOnion, it's better this way because if it was under the "My Team" tab then you would be able to see other team's emails and it would be available publicly, which is not something they would want. Having it under "Manage" requires you to be logged in to see the emails
oh holy shit you can get to the manage tab from my team @_@ thats what i was asking for hahahaha i'm retarded
Answers to your questions for those that were too lazy to read: 1) Starcraft 2 2) August 25 3) September 25 4) October 2 5) Map pool still being decided, feel free to post with your thoughts.
What's October 2?
Ah, that was the original "first match" date before we had so many teams ^^.
Why do we start later if there are more teams?
Starting earlier makes more sense....
It gives us a week to split you guys into divisions, another week for you guys to set lineups and practice for your matchups. I think originally we assumed that we would be able to form divisions in a day or two and figure out all the logistics, but with 129 (and counting!) teams, we might need a little more time to get things organized.
edit: also now that there are so many teams, there's been discussion of a year-long season because divisions might be extra large. In that case, it gives us more breathing room to fill the weeks between October and May.
Answers to your questions for those that were too lazy to read: 1) Starcraft 2 2) August 25 3) September 25 4) October 2 5) Map pool still being decided, feel free to post with your thoughts.
What's October 2?
Ah, that was the original "first match" date before we had so many teams ^^.
On September 07 2010 07:37 Sunyveil wrote: can we please, please have 2v2s this year >_<
or at least some way so that more people can play and it's not just the top 5-6 players again and again and again.
weird, before playoff, you should use who ever you got to test them all out... also ace in play off doesnt mean 1 pro vs 1 pro but sniper war, imagine NonY came out with his phoenix build and got snipe by some "nobody" make me smile :D
kinda like, idunno, finals of last season
final is only 1 day while the whole season last for 1 year... could you possibly change the whole entire year base on games you played in 1 day?
No :<...
btw, you want the entire year be decided by a 2v2 or a 1v1 Ace match? i bet the 2v2 would be double 6 pools into GG
On September 07 2010 07:37 Sunyveil wrote: can we please, please have 2v2s this year >_<
or at least some way so that more people can play and it's not just the top 5-6 players again and again and again.
weird, before playoff, you should use who ever you got to test them all out... also ace in play off doesnt mean 1 pro vs 1 pro but sniper war, imagine NonY came out with his phoenix build and got snipe by some "nobody" make me smile :D
kinda like, idunno, finals of last season
final is only 1 day while the whole season last for 1 year... could you possibly change the whole entire year base on games you played in 1 day?
No :<...
btw, you want the entire year be decided by a 2v2 or a 1v1 Ace match? i bet the 2v2 would be double 6 pools into GG
I think he's referring to Nony getting owned by a 'nobody' nub in the ace match of the finals last season's finals
On September 07 2010 07:37 Sunyveil wrote: can we please, please have 2v2s this year >_<
or at least some way so that more people can play and it's not just the top 5-6 players again and again and again.
weird, before playoff, you should use who ever you got to test them all out... also ace in play off doesnt mean 1 pro vs 1 pro but sniper war, imagine NonY came out with his phoenix build and got snipe by some "nobody" make me smile :D
kinda like, idunno, finals of last season
final is only 1 day while the whole season last for 1 year... could you possibly change the whole entire year base on games you played in 1 day?
No :<...
btw, you want the entire year be decided by a 2v2 or a 1v1 Ace match? i bet the 2v2 would be double 6 pools into GG
I think he's referring to Nony getting owned by a 'nobody' nub in the ace match of the finals last season's finals
It was pretty damn exciting if I do say so myself. Day9's commentary made it all the better!
There are actually 871 players, which means many are pending. Last season we were over 1000 players with ~70 teams. 31 teams have only 1 player. 64 teams have < 5 players.
There are actually 871 players, which means many are pending. Last season we were over 1000 players with ~70 teams. 31 teams have only 1 player. 64 teams have < 5 players.
sigh its a shame UC schools should be given a few additional days tbh..our semster starts the week registration closes.. we could get more people interested if given more time.
On September 14 2010 15:23 Illusion. wrote: sigh its a shame UC schools should be given a few additional days tbh..our semster starts the week registration closes.. we could get more people interested if given more time.
btw UCR fightingggggg
players can still be added to the team during the season... you just need to have a minimum of 4 or 5 players by the deadline that's coming up
On September 15 2010 19:11 NB wrote: dang! how long the IP ban last? i woke up in middle of the night and try to log in without even remembering my user name T_T
PM me your IP and username on the CSL site, and I will remove it for you.
On September 15 2010 19:11 NB wrote: dang! how long the IP ban last? i woke up in middle of the night and try to log in without even remembering my user name T_T
PM me your IP and username on the CSL site, and I will remove it for you.
awww, thanks... the ban removed after like 5 hours of sleep with 1 login token xD...
i used it to reset my pass and everything turned out neatly ^^
On September 20 2010 23:07 NB wrote: excuse me but i dont use my school email address... i have it set up so that any school system email is send directly into my yahoo mail account...
i do have my school email but no one use their since the system is really slow if you want to access it from off campus.
If you guys can set up an "alternative" subscribe email for each account on the CSL site it would be helpful, thank you
This already exists as a feature and is documented in the FAQ: http://www.cstarleague.com/faq#correspondence In which case you need to enter BOTH addresses. The first to verify you go to school, and the second for where you want to receive email.
Personally I'm gonna be kinda pissed if my school all of a sudden is more organized than last season -_- (which is probably gonna happen). Fuck you SC2 beta... lol
On September 22 2010 23:38 NB wrote: match point looks really good atm .... easy to forge FE or for Z to FE and fence off reapers
I was hoping that would be in the map pool too, one of my favorite BW maps
by the way i look at it right now, the nature is really easy to take so that 2 bases play is encourage...
unfortunately the sieg tanks advantage is quite large in XvT just same as BW and there is no defilers, no lurker or shuttle to zea bomb those shits x(.... excuse for my language.
main base size is a little small compare to BW to defend vs drop and the bottom cliff wont be defended by 1 turret (if you watch the TvT between thisisjimmy and "some player" on Iccup series casted by CatZ and Realcun 2 days ago, you would know)...
i think team with 1->4 people each should be drop if they cant provide the players list b4 oct 2.
about big team, i saw lots of bronze and plat level in that list, some are diamond but have only played around 50 games... We can make a rule to restrict players to register but its fine to ignore it
On September 27 2010 02:42 NB wrote: i think team with 1->4 people each should be drop if they cant provide the players list b4 oct 2.
about big team, i saw lots of bronze and plat level in that list, some are diamond but have only played around 50 games... We can make a rule to restrict players to register but its fine to ignore it
It's not like having a huge team of 30+ players gives them an advantage
On September 28 2010 07:34 NB wrote: what is the requirement for the commitment thing? waterloo is not committing?
Your coordinator should send us an email saying "we confirm our commitment" - that's the short version. There's an official template (which is like a couple sentences where you insert your school name and replay to us) that was sent to him/her awhile ago.
On September 28 2010 07:34 NB wrote: what is the requirement for the commitment thing? waterloo is not committing?
Your coordinator should send us an email saying "we confirm our commitment" - that's the short version. There's an official template (which is like a couple sentences where you insert your school name and replay to us) that was sent to him/her awhile ago.
Tell Steve to email us =P.
This is a copy of the email:
Subject: [Collegiate StarLeague] REPLY TO THIS EMAIL!! Please read this email very carefully, as it contains information about the upcoming season of the CSL. You have received this notification because you are a current coordinator or manager for a registered team.
======== THE IMPORTANT, LIFE THREATENING INFORMATION ========
Registration is closed, but you NEED to do the following by OCTOBER to play: 1. Have FIVE registered players with valid school-emails 2. Read the RULES (http://www.cstarleague.com/rules). 3. REPLY TO THIS EMAIL confirming that: Yes, our team, [team name], is committed to playing through the regular season of CSL from Fall 2010-Spring 2011 (October-May). We have read the rules for CSL Season 4 and will abide by them.
You MUST reply with an email confirming your commitment to staying in the season with no more than two match forfeits. If you are unsure that you can field players every week and remain an active team in the entire regular season, it is encouraged to respectfully withdraw before the season begins.
I just resent this to anyone who hasn't yet confirmed. Alot of coordinator and manager emails are failing - we will be validating email addresses this week so you may want to fix this!
I assume the first game is not this Saturday like the thread suggests? Seeing as how so many coordinators are being lax on confirming and I don't see the interface for match list and how to set people to play o.O
On October 01 2010 15:21 EtherealDeath wrote: I assume the first game is not this Saturday like the thread suggests? Seeing as how so many coordinators are being lax on confirming and I don't see the interface for match list and how to set people to play o.O
i think tomorrow is the deadline for team/player registration?
Correct. The league is NOT starting this weekend, this weekend is the deadline for confirming your team. We obviously need to know who is confirmed so we can finalize divisions and all that
Announcements will be made this weekend. Brace yourselves.
On October 02 2010 12:44 Phelix wrote: Are these leagues finalized yet on the CSL webpage? Clicking each school to check the division seems like a pain.
Thatssss a bug! ... which I just fixed.
We are still waiting on a few stragglers before releasing divisions. Sorry for the wait.
We have removed the following teams due to a lack of players. You've all received an email with further information - however I have noticed a few have bounced and would like to relay this information to everyone:
1 player teams: Pensacola State College Schoolcraft Community College Frostburg State University Southern New Hampshire University Vermont Law School Miami Dade College California State University Bakersfield Louisiana State University The University of Toledo College of Southern Nevada Georgia Southern University Kaplan Online University University of Maine University of Nebraska Lincoln State University of New York at Geneseo Navarro College State College of Florida Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis Wabash College Portland State University
2-3 player teams: University of South Carolina Upstate University of Texas San Antonio Old Dominion University Georgia State University University of Massachusetts Lowell University of Texas Tyler Baylor University Middlesex Community College University of Texas Health Science Center Brookdale Community College Oakland University Appalachian State University University of Northern Iowa Virginia Commonwealth University West Virginia University University of Delaware James Madison University Valparaiso University
We appreciate the time you took in registering your team and we hope that we'll see you again next season with a larger team. The more teams the merrier!
Edit: Additionally, the following teams officially resigned earlier during registration: University of Iowa, Indiana University Southeast, Lehigh University, & Ball State University
Thanks to those coordinators for taking the time to let us know directly!
Teams from Mohawk College, West Virginia University Institute of Technology, Sheridan College, California State Polytechnic University Pomona should contact us immediately or you risk losing your spot in this Season of CSL!!!
some people got sick of playing each other all the time, so we're randomizing the divisions a bit (with some exceptions for rivalry and neighbors). the divisions are also very, very balanced. not that we know all your players' b.net profiles.
On October 05 2010 09:57 hazelynut wrote: some people got sick of playing each other all the time, so we're randomizing the divisions a bit (with some exceptions for rivalry and neighbors). the divisions are also very, very balanced. not that we know all your players' b.net profiles.
When you say balanced, do you mean that the each division has a similar amount of good teams and bad teams compared to other divisions or that given a division it is likely that it will be very competitive (mostly similarly skilled teams)? From a purely BW CSL/name recognition stand point, it seems that some division have more high end teams than others, but then again, I'm really just eyeballing it at this point.
each division has a similar amount of good teams and bad teams*, and each division should have around the same number of "front-runners" with lots of room for competition for 3rd and 4th place in playoffs. the skill distribution in sc2 has changed a lot from BW days, so you'll probably see some surprising "upsets" this season (for example, duke's lineup in sc2 is completely different, UF has suddenly increased in skill, etc)
*actually, most teams are not "bad" teams but just teams with fewer 1500+ players than others.
On October 05 2010 11:51 Kinky wrote: Are the matches always set for the Saturday of that weekend or can the teams negotiate?
We'll be setting polls for each division so we can get an accurate idea of what works for all teams. The teams can always negotiate, but we'll prioritize the default time if neither of the teams can make a decision.
Also, we were only emailed with a pair of Ottawa schools demanding to be together they didn't want youuu, blame OU/Algonquin!
On October 05 2010 09:54 Ideas wrote: lol why is there such a weird division system? whatever happened to geography? :O
This system is kinda random. Geography seems more organized and exciting to me. Playing with schools I never heard of is not as exciting as playing with schools in the same state. I understand that there are balance concerns though. They say there's was a team in the Western Conference that was quite imbalanced last season.
I don't think the creators of these divisions took into account time zones. Some of us are trying to support social lives and if the time in which my division (which it probably will) chooses to play games is Saturday evening. Being on the east coast our "evening" will be 3 hours later than the majority of the teams which are West coast.
Also terrible iCCup maps chosen. But thats less of an issue than the rules of play time and this poll.
On October 06 2010 08:02 Phaint wrote: I don't think the creators of these divisions took into account time zones. Some of us are trying to support social lives and if the time in which my division (which it probably will) chooses to play games is Saturday evening. Being on the east coast our "evening" will be 3 hours later than the majority of the teams which are West coast.
Also terrible iCCup maps chosen. But thats less of an issue than the rules of play time and this poll.
weird when you consider Sat afternoon to be busy... Most of the club are on Friday nite and Sat afternoon (1-4 pm) is the period when we wake up ...
On October 06 2010 08:02 Phaint wrote: I don't think the creators of these divisions took into account time zones. Some of us are trying to support social lives and if the time in which my division (which it probably will) chooses to play games is Saturday evening. Being on the east coast our "evening" will be 3 hours later than the majority of the teams which are West coast.
Also terrible iCCup maps chosen. But thats less of an issue than the rules of play time and this poll.
Please don't speak impersonally about the tournament organizers or your concerns. If you have a problem, I would appreciate it if you spoke directly about any problems instead of making vague references to "the creators" or "some of us."
Currently it is possible to reschedule your matches on a match-by-match basis with the other teams you will be playing. I have found that most teams are very flexible about rescheduling if there are other commitments going on. The default time is there so that there will be a designated time if neither team can come to an agreement if a reschedule is desired.
On October 06 2010 08:02 Phaint wrote: I don't think the creators of these divisions took into account time zones. Some of us are trying to support social lives and if the time in which my division (which it probably will) chooses to play games is Saturday evening. Being on the east coast our "evening" will be 3 hours later than the majority of the teams which are West coast.
Also terrible iCCup maps chosen. But thats less of an issue than the rules of play time and this poll.
Please don't speak impersonally about the tournament organizers or your concerns. If you have a problem, I would appreciate it if you spoke directly about any problems instead of making vague references to "the creators" or "some of us."
Currently it is possible to reschedule your matches on a match-by-match basis with the other teams you will be playing. I have found that most teams are very flexible about rescheduling if there are other commitments going on. The default time is there so that there will be a designated time if neither team can come to an agreement if a reschedule is desired.
I'm very much aware of all the mechanics of the league and I applaud you guys for what you've done. I'm just calling this to attention as I feel like this was entirely looked over. I guess I'll see the poll results and try it out before I judge further.
On October 06 2010 08:02 Phaint wrote: I don't think the creators of these divisions took into account time zones. Some of us are trying to support social lives and if the time in which my division (which it probably will) chooses to play games is Saturday evening. Being on the east coast our "evening" will be 3 hours later than the majority of the teams which are West coast.
Also terrible iCCup maps chosen. But thats less of an issue than the rules of play time and this poll.
Please don't speak impersonally about the tournament organizers or your concerns. If you have a problem, I would appreciate it if you spoke directly about any problems instead of making vague references to "the creators" or "some of us."
Currently it is possible to reschedule your matches on a match-by-match basis with the other teams you will be playing. I have found that most teams are very flexible about rescheduling if there are other commitments going on. The default time is there so that there will be a designated time if neither team can come to an agreement if a reschedule is desired.
I'm very much aware of all the mechanics of the league and I applaud you guys for what you've done. I'm just calling this to attention as I feel like this was entirely looked over. I guess I'll see the poll results and try it out before I judge further.
it wasn't entirely looked over, there's a huge spread of teams and things were created as best they could be. aka most texas teams are playing each other. there has to be some time zone conflict because unfortunately there weren't evenly distributed teams across every timezone.
also there is a very annoying bug on the website i submitted a bug report but I haven't gotten a confirmed reply and I know there was a bit of email switching around during earlier seasons, I just want to make sure it gets taken care of
its a bug where in the management tab when you try to organize by name, email, ID, or status in descending or ascending order it doesn't work.
yo, we take sc2 seriously here. no social lives allowed.
on a serious note, we decided divisions this year mostly taking balance into consideration, so that california isn't stacked, mid-west doesn't get a bye into the playoffs, etc. we knew time zone would be an issue, but having a standard default time is always an issue. fortunately, it's an issue it can be solved by negotiating with your opponent.
also, i'm curious about the opinions on map pools - why are they terrible? granted, we weren't able to test them in depth with thousands of games, but we've spent a good 30+ games either playing on it ourselves or asking whatever top200 players we knew to get a general feel for a map. these two maps were also suggested by the iccup mapmakers when we made the map pool, so perhaps they're out of date, but i'm really not sure where you are getting this terrible factor.
On October 06 2010 12:27 hazelynut wrote: yo, we take sc2 seriously here. no social lives allowed.
on a serious note, we decided divisions this year mostly taking balance into consideration, so that california isn't stacked, mid-west doesn't get a bye into the playoffs, etc. we knew time zone would be an issue, but having a standard default time is always an issue. fortunately, it's an issue it can be solved by negotiating with your opponent.
also, i'm curious about the opinions on map pools - why are they terrible? granted, we weren't able to test them in depth with thousands of games, but we've spent a good 30+ games either playing on it ourselves or asking whatever top200 players we knew to get a general feel for a map. these two maps were also suggested by the iccup mapmakers when we made the map pool, so perhaps they're out of date, but i'm really not sure where you are getting this terrible factor.
personally, i consider the map pool to be just fine
Noticed how iccup maps and blizz maps are totally different: +iccup has +1 mineral patches which will increase your minerals income and have a safe nature opening => encourage FE build
+blizz has open nat and wide main => 1 base heavy
these a 2 TOTALLY OPPOSITE play styles that you would have to adapt to => good
and yes, i have played more than 30 games on those maps... much more than 30...
edit: those ideas do not apply on crossfire, i think that is a very WRONG PICK
I think its a bad idea to use anything other than ladder maps. And I'll give my reasoning:
Blizzard is still patching the game for balance. They are getting the data for patching based on the results they gather from ladder maps.
The other maps seem fine imo. If anything, I think they'll favor Z a little more, because of how big they are and the designs of the natural expansions favor at least getting that first expansion. And, currently, thats a good thing, because Z is generally having problems right now.
But what if a balance patch changes the dynamics of the game somehow? What if, for instance, they reverse the effect of creep so that it slows enemy units (including enemy Z) rather than speeds up Z units only, and give every Z the movement speed they have on creep permanently? And, hypothetically, this actually generates a nearly perfect balance between the races on the ladder maps? Suddenly, a massive map gives Z a huge speed advantage over the other races, because the patch was designed with smaller maps in mind..... And, all of a sudden, these maps are imbalanced, and we won't even realize it until after a couple of matches have been played..... There are other changes I can think of that could make a much bigger/different/unintended effect on larger maps than those used in the ladder.
Don't get me wrong, I do like the maps. I love Crossfire. But because of how long the season is, it may cause some problems should a balance patch come out and make some kind of change that will affect these maps a lot more/differently than the current ladder maps. In a tournament like this, using non-ladder maps is a really bad thing imo. At least at the moment.
I feel that 2v2 should be unique players, since most teams can field more than 5 players, and won't degenerate into top 3 players on a team, and hope that they all don't play the same race; or at least that's how I think most teams will handle the 2v2 situation. Honestly, teamwork isn't as important as skill in a match, and this allows more team spirit and cooperation in play.
On October 06 2010 12:50 Phelix wrote: I feel that 2v2 should be unique players, since most teams can field more than 5 players, and won't degenerate into top 3 players on a team, and hope that they all don't play the same race; or at least that's how I think most teams will handle the 2v2 situation. Honestly, teamwork isn't as important as skill in a match, and this allows more team spirit and cooperation in play.
NO!!! 2v2 should not even be in the format in the beginning putting it in is already a huge handicap that universities who have strong "ace" giving for new teams. If you think the 2v2 will affect your university result, its your responsibility to practice and prepare for it.
Can I make a slight suggestion to the rules for the CSL? How about, in the first 3 games (2 1v1 and 1 2v2), you have to have 4 unique players in it? The 4th game can be a repeat from the 2v2, and ace can be a repeat from either the 2v2 or 1v1 (but obviously not the 2v2, the 4th game, and the ace)? That would solve some of the problems of teams stacking their best 3 players, without having to resort to 5 unique players in the first 4 games.
On October 06 2010 13:43 slained wrote: I strongly am against 2vs2 it simply just doesn't have the same entertainment value as a 1v1 vs really strong players.
I feel like 80% of the games will just be who rushes better.
I feel very much like the iccup maps are far more balanced, and allow for more variety than the current blizz maps do. The biggest of the blizz ladder maps are medium sized at best, favoring early aggression and one base play. The iccup maps don't feel to me like they limit one base play, but make it more practical to fast expand and continue to play towards the mid-late game.
On October 06 2010 08:02 Phaint wrote: I don't think the creators of these divisions took into account time zones. Some of us are trying to support social lives and if the time in which my division (which it probably will) chooses to play games is Saturday evening. Being on the east coast our "evening" will be 3 hours later than the majority of the teams which are West coast.
Also terrible iCCup maps chosen. But thats less of an issue than the rules of play time and this poll.
Please don't speak impersonally about the tournament organizers or your concerns. If you have a problem, I would appreciate it if you spoke directly about any problems instead of making vague references to "the creators" or "some of us."
Currently it is possible to reschedule your matches on a match-by-match basis with the other teams you will be playing. I have found that most teams are very flexible about rescheduling if there are other commitments going on. The default time is there so that there will be a designated time if neither team can come to an agreement if a reschedule is desired.
I'm very much aware of all the mechanics of the league and I applaud you guys for what you've done. I'm just calling this to attention as I feel like this was entirely looked over. I guess I'll see the poll results and try it out before I judge further.
I'm not sure what the problem is, could you specify? At 8pm Saturday Night EST last season, there were always like, a dozen or two games going on. Which suggests this is a good time... How does Saturday night conflict with a social life or something? If you'd rather go out on Saturday night, go out... there's always Friday night too, of course.
There's a reason why there are 3 times for both Saturday and Sunday... if you'd rather play in the afternoon, then vote for that time. This is also why we have a poll +_+.
On October 06 2010 12:44 Impervious wrote: I think its a bad idea to use anything other than ladder maps. And I'll give my reasoning:
Blizzard is still patching the game for balance. They are getting the data for patching based on the results they gather from ladder maps.
The other maps seem fine imo. If anything, I think they'll favor Z a little more, because of how big they are and the designs of the natural expansions favor at least getting that first expansion. And, currently, thats a good thing, because Z is generally having problems right now.
But what if a balance patch changes the dynamics of the game somehow? What if, for instance, they reverse the effect of creep so that it slows enemy units (including enemy Z) rather than speeds up Z units only, and give every Z the movement speed they have on creep permanently? And, hypothetically, this actually generates a nearly perfect balance between the races on the ladder maps? Suddenly, a massive map gives Z a huge speed advantage over the other races, because the patch was designed with smaller maps in mind..... And, all of a sudden, these maps are imbalanced, and we won't even realize it until after a couple of matches have been played..... There are other changes I can think of that could make a much bigger/different/unintended effect on larger maps than those used in the ladder.
Don't get me wrong, I do like the maps. I love Crossfire. But because of how long the season is, it may cause some problems should a balance patch come out and make some kind of change that will affect these maps a lot more/differently than the current ladder maps. In a tournament like this, using non-ladder maps is a really bad thing imo. At least at the moment.
At least thats my view on it.
If Blizzard made a patch that huge, we'd switch the maps if we thought necessary. lol -_-.
My concern with Iccup maps is that there will be a general lack of familiarity with Iccup maps. Most of the new SC2 players have never even heard of Iccup. There'll will be confusion on how to get those iccup maps and how to play on it, since most players have never played on a Iccup map before. Plus there might be balance issues, since top players wouldn't waste their time practicing on a Iccup map.
On October 06 2010 16:54 T.O.P. wrote: My concern with Iccup maps is that there will be a general lack of familiarity with Iccup maps. Most of the new SC2 players have never even heard of Iccup. There'll will be confusion on how to get those iccup maps and how to play on it, since most players have never played on a Iccup map before. Plus there might be balance issues, since top players wouldn't waste their time practicing on a Iccup map.
map balance issues? Have you not seen the Blizzard ladder maps?
On October 06 2010 12:05 mOnion wrote: also there is a very annoying bug on the website i submitted a bug report but I haven't gotten a confirmed reply and I know there was a bit of email switching around during earlier seasons, I just want to make sure it gets taken care of
Thanks, I know about it. All feedback is emailed to me directly, so I read it shortly thereafter. There is a large list of submitted bugs and feature requests that I haven't been able to get to due to prioritizing admin tools for the league.
It will be fixed, but I'm the only person working on the core right now!
On October 06 2010 12:27 hazelynut wrote: on a serious note, we decided divisions this year mostly taking balance into consideration, so that california isn't stacked, mid-west doesn't get a bye into the playoffs, etc.
I don't mean to be overly critical here, but the midwest division last fall had a three way tie for second, with the team that ultimately made the playoffs from the tie (Waterloo) winning the whole CSL. Did you really need to pick on us like that? :X
On October 06 2010 12:27 hazelynut wrote: on a serious note, we decided divisions this year mostly taking balance into consideration, so that california isn't stacked, mid-west doesn't get a bye into the playoffs, etc.
I don't mean to be overly critical here, but the midwest division last fall had a three way tie for second, with the team that ultimately made the playoffs from the tie (Waterloo) winning the whole CSL. Did you really need to pick on us like that? :X
Sorry for any offense! It probably didn't come across too clearly, but those should all be in quotes "California isn't stacked, mid-west doesn't get a bye" -- there's some truth to California having many contenders, but I don't actually believe that California was too stacked for competition. I was referring to one of the divisions that were purely Big 10 schools out of respect for the traditional sports rivalry, and I believe one of the playoff contenders (Michigan?) actually mentioned that the division was probably not balanced well at all in terms of SC. Waterloo/Toronto's division, on the other hand, was stacked as hell.
On October 06 2010 12:27 hazelynut wrote: on a serious note, we decided divisions this year mostly taking balance into consideration, so that california isn't stacked, mid-west doesn't get a bye into the playoffs, etc.
I don't mean to be overly critical here, but the midwest division last fall had a three way tie for second, with the team that ultimately made the playoffs from the tie (Waterloo) winning the whole CSL. Did you really need to pick on us like that? :X
Sorry for any offense! It probably didn't come across too clearly, but those should all be in quotes "California isn't stacked, mid-west doesn't get a bye" -- there's some truth to California having many contenders, but I don't actually believe that California was too stacked for competition. I was referring to one of the divisions that were purely Big 10 schools out of respect for the traditional sports rivalry, and I believe one of the playoff contenders (Michigan?) actually mentioned that the division was probably not balanced well at all in terms of SC. Waterloo/Toronto's division, on the other hand, was stacked as hell.
On October 07 2010 02:56 NB wrote: u guys make me confused.... wtf is "stacked"
same coast? same geographic area? WHY IS IT MATTER?
we should split division in skill/ranking level based on last season, new schools put into random mode => simple and clean
Its not like we have all the seeds in 1 division...
btw: from the waterloo's team respective, we find our division quite comfortable
It just happens that some geographic areas correlate with higher ranked SC2 college players. That's why it matters. Arranging by geographic region results in slightly unbalanced divisions. For example, if we put Toronto, Waterloo, and York together because they were all in Canada, we'd already be making some divisions easier to make into playoffs than others.
We split divisions randomly based on current SC2 skill/ranking levels (SC2ranks), with some exceptions for geographical region when we were either aware or notified.
Darn, should have told everyone on our team to choose a random gosu to temporarily be their account until group selections and then change everything....o well.
On October 07 2010 13:03 ReketSomething wrote: Darn, should have told everyone on our team to choose a random gosu to temporarily be their account until group selections and then change everything....o well.
LOL. Depending on how gosu of a player you pick, I'd notice if any of CSL's highest ranked players suddenly disappeared. =P.
On October 08 2010 13:11 dekuschrub wrote: uhh this is sc2 right?
Im at University of Illinois but it has no1 coordinating? what do i do?
There are teams for both University of Illinois campuses, not sure what you mean. I'm at UIUC, let me know if you need any help getting signed up or anything
My division has UCF (Whiplash and Spades) Harvey Mudd College (qxc and co.) and McMaster (SUGGY). Thats one school from socal, one school from canada, one school from florida, in a division that I think was designed for mid atlantic coast.
x.x
I'm pretty sure our division has 3 of the highest ranked players in all of CSL outside of masterasia....faaaaaaaaaa*
PS: What is the confirmed map pool? I tried looking on the CSL website, couldn't find it.
On October 09 2010 05:42 ZlaSHeR wrote: My division has UCF (Whiplash and Spades) Harvey Mudd College (qxc and co.) and McMaster (SUGGY). Thats one school from socal, one school from canada, one school from florida, in a division that I think was designed for mid atlantic coast.
x.x
I'm pretty sure our division has 3 of the highest ranked players in all of CSL outside of masterasia....faaaaaaaaaa*
PS: What is the confirmed map pool? I tried looking on the CSL website, couldn't find it.
the Harvey mud division is really doomed... but life happen desu desu
Yeah I mean, my team isn't bad either, I think we could compete for a really low playoff seed in almost every division, but HMC, UCF, and McMaster all in one division? all three of those teams are semifinalist caliber teams.
On October 09 2010 06:42 ZlaSHeR wrote: Yeah I mean, my team isn't bad either, I think we could compete for a really low playoff seed in almost every division, but HMC, UCF, and McMaster all in one division? all three of those teams are semifinalist caliber teams.
i believe thats where the 2v2 match come into place for ya
On October 09 2010 06:42 ZlaSHeR wrote: Yeah I mean, my team isn't bad either, I think we could compete for a really low playoff seed in almost every division, but HMC, UCF, and McMaster all in one division? all three of those teams are semifinalist caliber teams.
Harvey Mudd was originally in Leviathan but Houston wanted to be with the other Texas schools so we switched. Also Harvey Mudd is like...Hwaseung Oz......................................Well, maybe not since we never actually got to the 5th set last season lolol. (either got dominated with only qxc winning or we won 3-0/1 lol)
In response to concerns about the site being or reacting slow:
We will be moving away from an experimental DNS service we used to handle spam, back to our original DNS servers tonight. This should solve any problems with accessibility.
You might experience downtime, but all changes should complete within 24 hours (at the latest). If the site is not reachable for you during this time, try flushing your DNS cache.
If you absolutely need your CSL fix, you can always read about the Hosts File and than map the following: 178.79.135.132 cstarleague.com 178.79.135.132 www.cstarleague.com
Oh shit Harvey Mudd got switched into Valkyrie? I'd be worried but someones already hyped my team (McMaster) as a heavy hitter thats going to dominate the division. Guess we have to live up to that then.
I think all divisions are balanced this way though. Don't like how they're switching teams around after setting the divisions down however.
On October 14 2010 14:35 yenta wrote: List of things to worry about: Server needs to be optimized as large influx of users during streams = instant death. yay.
On October 14 2010 14:35 yenta wrote: List of things to worry about: Server needs to be optimized as large influx of users during streams = instant death. yay.
You guys aren't using free hosting right?
We're using linode, with the simplest possible LAMP setup. I've been meaning to switch over to Nginx and was thinking about setup failover/loadbalancing with amazon's s3 webservices - Today pretty much sealed the deal on that.
On October 14 2010 14:38 Phaint wrote: Oh shit Harvey Mudd got switched into Valkyrie? I'd be worried but someones already hyped my team (McMaster) as a heavy hitter thats going to dominate the division. Guess we have to live up to that then.
I think all divisions are balanced this way though. Don't like how they're switching teams around after setting the divisions down however.
We only switched 2? 3? teams around to accommodate rivalries. There will be another team added tonight (Day[9] threw alot of visitors our way ) which will leave 2 more "free" spots in divisions, unless we decide to add another week of play.
On October 14 2010 14:38 Phaint wrote: Oh shit Harvey Mudd got switched into Valkyrie? I'd be worried but someones already hyped my team (McMaster) as a heavy hitter thats going to dominate the division. Guess we have to live up to that then.
I think all divisions are balanced this way though. Don't like how they're switching teams around after setting the divisions down however.
We only switched 2? 3? teams around to accommodate rivalries. There will be another team added tonight (Day[9] threw alot of visitors our way ) which will leave 2 more "free" spots in divisions, unless we decide to add another week of play.
To add onto that, we did that with 24 hours of releasing divisions and with permission (or at least notification) to involved parties if you haven't seen HMC in Valkyrie as of yet, you must have checked immediately within 3 hours of release and never looked back at it ever again.
On August 16 2010 17:56 NB wrote: UW, are we contacting by that email list or what? ...
You should specify which UW . Though I guess people that know you will know?
well im from canada.... thats should be clear >.<... U waterloo hwaiting!!!
sad how most of our members are on workterm or vacation and not on campus atm... the line up might be late but would be really strong.
wondering if we can recuit HuK and Silver though? they dont go to our school but they live near by the area and no school near by except us is participating.
On October 14 2010 14:38 Phaint wrote: Oh shit Harvey Mudd got switched into Valkyrie? I'd be worried but someones already hyped my team (McMaster) as a heavy hitter thats going to dominate the division. Guess we have to live up to that then.
I think all divisions are balanced this way though. Don't like how they're switching teams around after setting the divisions down however.
We only switched 2? 3? teams around to accommodate rivalries. There will be another team added tonight (Day[9] threw alot of visitors our way ) which will leave 2 more "free" spots in divisions, unless we decide to add another week of play.
When you say free spots do you mean for extra teams? The only reason i ask is cause i saw that Ryerson didnt have one on the site, and i just saw this yesterday(after joining here)
On October 14 2010 14:38 Phaint wrote: Oh shit Harvey Mudd got switched into Valkyrie? I'd be worried but someones already hyped my team (McMaster) as a heavy hitter thats going to dominate the division. Guess we have to live up to that then.
I think all divisions are balanced this way though. Don't like how they're switching teams around after setting the divisions down however.
We only switched 2? 3? teams around to accommodate rivalries. There will be another team added tonight (Day[9] threw alot of visitors our way ) which will leave 2 more "free" spots in divisions, unless we decide to add another week of play.
When you say free spots do you mean for extra teams? The only reason i ask is cause i saw that Ryerson didnt have one on the site, and i just saw this yesterday(after joining here)
We can safely add 3 teams w/o having to regenerate the schedule. If you can assemble a team of 5 players by Saturday night, contact us directly and we'll try to work you in.
On October 14 2010 14:35 yenta wrote: List of things to worry about: Server needs to be optimized as large influx of users during streams = instant death. yay.
You guys aren't using free hosting right?
We're using linode, with the simplest possible LAMP setup. I've been meaning to switch over to Nginx and was thinking about setup failover/loadbalancing with amazon's s3 webservices - Today pretty much sealed the deal on that.
Switching to nginx will help. You might probably want to add memcached.
You won't get failover with just S3, you'll need to have a running web server too, which means you need EC2. But linode isn't down often anyways so that's really a unnecessary expense. Might as well get a more powerful vps/dedicated server.
On October 19 2010 17:08 Jergen wrote: This is the kinda thing you wish you knew about earlier. How long do the seasons last?
On a related note, anyone out there from VCU?
With so many participating teams, the Season lasts a full year! Maybe it would be possible to have semester-long seasons, but we would need more divisions!
so what will exactly happen at midnight when the deadline is past? emails sent out to managers who didnt submit lineup? 24 hours until ace penalty? sup
On October 20 2010 15:19 JiYan wrote: so what will exactly happen at midnight when the deadline is past? emails sent out to managers who didnt submit lineup? 24 hours until ace penalty? sup
people will be getting warnings this time around. all matchups that have both lineups submitted will be revealed. :D
First round slackers: Mohawk College - where are you?? Western Illinois University OK University of Manitoba OK University of Oregon OK Randolph College OK
On October 20 2010 18:28 yenta wrote: First round slackers: Mohawk College Western Illinois University University of Manitoba University of Oregon Randolph College
On October 20 2010 18:28 yenta wrote: First round slackers: Mohawk College Western Illinois University University of Manitoba University of Oregon Randolph College
Lineups, SUP??
is that all? UWaterloo submitted?
Waterloo had problems w/ coordinator going MIA - Antimage and Gerbil will be coordinating now and their lineup will be up shortly. I didn't include them as we know what is going on. I did not understand what was going on, disregard this. Sorry Steve!
As to these 5 schools - no clue whatsoever. 5 isn't bad. We'll see how it is later in the season.
On October 21 2010 06:19 CrispyTender wrote: Hey I just took over as the coordinator for University of Manitoba team, the other guy went MIA. I should have a lineup ready by tommorowtonight
DarthThienAn will post info on how matches should be run this weekend (using the match page's chat since Battle.net 2.0 lacks chat channels for organization) Update: He gave it the pretentious title, Guide to Life
On October 21 2010 06:19 CrispyTender wrote: Hey I just took over as the coordinator for University of Manitoba team, the other guy went MIA. I should have a lineup ready by tommorowtonight
I hope ^^
Yeah, don't make our province/university look bad. You guys had better tear it up.
I have a player in the 2v2 set who can't make it to the default time but can make it later in the day, so is it possible to have the three 1v1 sets play at the default time and have the 2v2 set played later?
Apparently our coordinator (for U of M) can't manage the team through his account. Would anyone know anything about that? we do have a lineup ready though.
On October 22 2010 04:27 Tercotta wrote: Is there going to be replays released. Or do I just have to follow my school on the site.
Replays will automatically available when players report their matches.
On October 22 2010 09:55 Kinky wrote: I have a player in the 2v2 set who can't make it to the default time but can make it later in the day, so is it possible to have the three 1v1 sets play at the default time and have the 2v2 set played later?
Yea, like Impervious said, talk to the other coordinator. It is allowed.
i would recommend NOT STREAMING LIVE just to make sure all the result are clean... you could stream replays if you want to but if thats my game, i would disagree to have any obs (unless it is required)
On October 23 2010 09:45 NB wrote: i would recommend NOT STREAMING LIVE just to make sure all the result are clean... you could stream replays if you want to but if thats my game, i would disagree to have any obs (unless it is required)
On October 23 2010 09:45 NB wrote: i would recommend NOT STREAMING LIVE just to make sure all the result are clean... you could stream replays if you want to but if thats my game, i would disagree to have any obs (unless it is required)
but but. it's cooler live ^^
i do agree but "me no need famous" :3... i mean thing like cheating using stream did happen in the past right?... the only "safe"stream i find right now is iccup.tv since raelcun made a HUGE delay between stream and live so its ok to let them stream... otherwise...
On October 23 2010 09:45 NB wrote: i would recommend NOT STREAMING LIVE just to make sure all the result are clean... you could stream replays if you want to but if thats my game, i would disagree to have any obs (unless it is required)
but but. it's cooler live ^^
i do agree but "me no need famous" :3... i mean thing like cheating using stream did happen in the past right?... the only "safe"stream i find right now is iccup.tv since raelcun made a HUGE delay between stream and live so its ok to let them stream... otherwise...
On October 23 2010 17:51 ReketSomething wrote: Why would anyone cheat in a prizeless for fun league... I think the cheating occurred during the TSL if I remember properly...
Stream cheating? No way... the TSL cheating was ladder abuse/account abuse and stuff. Nothing to do with the streaming -_-
Well, this is getting problematic. I'm in the process of reporting a forfeit loss after waiting forever for the opponent's 4th set player but they're begging me to give them more time, and all the while my player is getting pissed as hell with waiting :/
On October 24 2010 10:45 Kinky wrote: Well, this is getting problematic. I'm in the process of reporting a forfeit loss after waiting forever for the opponent's 4th set player but they're begging me to give them more time, and all the while my player is getting pissed as hell with waiting :/
If your player really has to go, call an admin to see how long you've been waiting and claim the FF. Screenshot if you can. It's pretty BM to be late so if you're in the right and following the rules, don't worry about it.
can UCR have a stream next week as well? a lot of the team's friends really enjoyed it and we have plans to get more people to watch and advertise it to the school, but i dont want to hype it at school if no one can stream us.
On October 24 2010 11:16 Kinky wrote: I actually just let them off and allowed them to play an hour after their agreed time, and my player lost. Onto the ace match~
And a 6pool in the ace match -_- Sigh, I shouldn't be so lenient with things like this.
On October 23 2010 09:45 NB wrote: i would recommend NOT STREAMING LIVE just to make sure all the result are clean... you could stream replays if you want to but if thats my game, i would disagree to have any obs (unless it is required)
Eh we did it heavily on honor last season. Had observers from both schools in the game. Heck, that's what we did this week in the UNC vs IU match too. Cheaters will cheat one way or another - easiest way is to have people help watch minimap over your shoulder, and that can't be fixed.
On October 23 2010 09:18 Impervious wrote: That fucking sucks. Potentially the first one to bite the dust.....
And I know I'm trying to arrange a streamer for the UOttawa vs WillametteU match on Sunday, as well as every match we end up playing.
Carleton and U Ottawa should be done in person on a friday afternoon or something on campus.
Set up card board box booths!
They could be sent to different rooms to actually play.
Well what's the fun in that?
Do it in a common aera. Have someone livecast it. Let the public watch, trust me. When videogames go up in a common aera people come to watch.
The problem is deciding which campus to do it on.....
I think you can book the Atrium at Carleton for stuff like this. A very high traffic aera. As that is where I am from I don't know much about U of O. Flip a coin. Loser gets it next season.
Replays for each match can be downloaded on each match page.
Schedule now auto defaults to current round.
Added results to team page and schedule page.
Fixed bug where editing a match as division admin did not set ace flags.
I'll add a link to download all of the replays for a given round tonight. (Have to write a script to generate / update static replay packs for each match / round every 30 or so minutes as opposed to dynamic generation that is happening right now)
Was bored last night and starting working on a bit of a stats tool for CSL Currently only has the Immortal Division because that's the one we're in, but I'll work on it some more this week (lots of work to do this week and gre lol >_>) and then a lot more next week. There is quite a bit to do, haven't really bothered with prettyfying the display yet among other things, player names / university names should link to appropriate pages etc etc.
edit - changed site location. it's at csl.zhanxz.net now. Shorter name is good :-)
Any features you guys feel would be particularly useful/interesting to have?
Here is a teaser which you can find on the page, the Immortal Division top 20 players by rating!
the game was released 2-3 months so i assume its to be from 60 to 90 days 6000/60 = 100 games a day 6000/90 = 67 games a day.... and al of those are diamond level? assuming each game cost 10-15 mins...
1000 mins = 16 hours a day 670 mins = 11 hours a day.... WOW WOW WOW
On October 27 2010 08:57 NB wrote: the game was released 2-3 months so i assume its to be from 60 to 90 days 6000/60 = 100 games a day 6000/90 = 67 games a day.... and al of those are diamond level? assuming each game cost 10-15 mins...
1000 mins = 16 hours a day 670 mins = 11 hours a day.... WOW WOW WOW
lol yeah, thats pretty ridiculous (11hr/day). I'm guessing some days, like weekends, people play like ~14+ hours too. sooo crazy.
On October 27 2010 06:45 AndrewTo wrote: wow, ItsSoFLUFFY from UC Davis has played over 6000 games!
he used a macro program to do it, that would auto lose by joining games and leaving at the very start. eventually when you get to 0 bronze, you get matched against other people running the same thing, and about 50% of the time you get wins, thereby getting u a bunch of wins really fast.
So after he got all his pics he started playing again
When you go to create a custom game, type in "ICCUP" in the search bar. Your search will show a bunch of maps with the ICCUP tag, including the maps used in the CSL.
On October 27 2010 13:36 Phelix wrote: Hmm, the 12/6 expos have 7 mineral patches, while the 3/9 expos have 8 mineral patches. Is this intentional, or will this be fixed in time?
Also, the middle ridges can cause units to be warped in the middle via a WP/pylon, and I would assume this spot can be dropped as well with tanks.
I should not share this out but i think its a good idea for the staff to consider on map picking: ICCUP maps and blizz maps are different from the VERY CORE.
The reason for 1 more mineral patch is to give you extra income(mineral base) on 1 base so that taking the nature and expand will be much more easier compare to blizz maps. What does this means is that if on a blizz map you reach saturation at 16 (assuming 8 patches with 2 workers each) workers count, on the new iccup map it would be 18. this means that by the time you get to 18 probes, the income on ICCUP map is MUCH higher than blizz therefore with certain "close nature" map design, FE is quite easy even if you are 4 gating. This will change a LOT of things including the definition of all-in play and the timing push. The longer the games go, the more different it will make between ICCUP and blizz. This is also 1 of the reason y crossfire is a STUPID map considering how hard to play FE on it.
2 different map systems will result 2 different game plays and 2 different mechanic so map choice and practice are quite important.
i made this post at 3:44AM so there might be some mistakes, go confirm it urself.
Did you know that on some of the ICCUP map, instead of a default "curving" mineral line, the map designer purposely make it a "line" so that MANNER PYLON is POSSIBLE?
On October 27 2010 13:36 Phelix wrote: Hmm, the 12/6 expos have 7 mineral patches, while the 3/9 expos have 8 mineral patches. Is this intentional, or will this be fixed in time?
Also, the middle ridges can cause units to be warped in the middle via a WP/pylon, and I would assume this spot can be dropped as well with tanks.
I should not share this out but i think its a good idea for the staff to consider on map picking: ICCUP maps and blizz maps are different from the VERY CORE.
The reason for 1 more mineral patch is to give you extra income(mineral base) on 1 base so that taking the nature and expand will be much more easier compare to blizz maps. What does this means is that if on a blizz map you reach saturation at 16 (assuming 8 patches with 2 workers each) workers count, on the new iccup map it would be 18. this means that by the time you get to 18 probes, the income on ICCUP map is MUCH higher than blizz therefore with certain "close nature" map design, FE is quite easy even if you are 4 gating. This will change a LOT of things including the definition of all-in play and the timing push. The longer the games go, the more different it will make between ICCUP and blizz. This is also 1 of the reason y crossfire is a STUPID map considering how hard to play FE on it.
2 different map systems will result 2 different game plays and 2 different mechanic so map choice and practice are quite important.
i made this post at 3:44AM so there might be some mistakes, go confirm it urself.
Did you know that on some of the ICCUP map, instead of a default "curving" mineral line, the map designer purposely make it a "line" so that MANNER PYLON is POSSIBLE?
Why is it bad if people have to prepare different styles for different maps? That's part of what makes the game so good...
Aside from that, Phelix is just talking about a map "imbalance" in terms of spawning positions. Like he said, the traditional thirds for each players might have different # mineral patches, which would obviously favor the player with more minerals. We noticed this when testing maps, and let the ICCup mapmakers know... I was assuming they would have fixed it by now o.O.
On October 27 2010 08:36 DarthThienAn wrote: I already know all this information. Looks good though xD
What! Secret admin tools eh >:o
Yeah, we have a ghetto tru rnk algorizzle set up to judge the powa of teams. Just got a proposition for an Incubator project for a real statistics page though -
On October 27 2010 08:36 DarthThienAn wrote: I already know all this information. Looks good though xD
What! Secret admin tools eh >:o
Yeah, we have a ghetto tru rnk algorizzle set up to judge the powa of teams. Just got a proposition for an Incubator project for a real statistics page though -
ah i c
Well, sometime tonight or midday tomorrow I'll have auto parse for every school and player I can find on your page up, and I guess in the process of parsing every team page I'll just display their match history as well on the team pages I have on my site, and have each match link to the appropriate page on cstarleague or something. At which point, everything will be set up for any major additions I think... race statistics would be straightforward. MU and map statistics I would just have to make a parser for using the match pages that I parse off of team pages.
edit - only parsing every now and then, storing the results in a database on my server, so don't worry about too high a % of non person hits showing up lol
On October 29 2010 14:57 NB wrote: problem occurred: LOTS of players use their 2nd race for 2v2 and csl website can only report 1 race.
Suggestion: make 2 teams declared their 2v2 race when they submit line up
? What do you mean? When you submit a lineup, you submit the race along with it. Your "default" race doesn't actually matter if you're good about submitting lineups, you can play whatever race you want, regardless of the race listed in your profile.
On October 29 2010 14:57 NB wrote: problem occurred: LOTS of players use their 2nd race for 2v2 and csl website can only report 1 race.
Suggestion: make 2 teams declared their 2v2 race when they submit line up
? What do you mean? When you submit a lineup, you submit the race along with it. Your "default" race doesn't actually matter if you're good about submitting lineups, you can play whatever race you want, regardless of the race listed in your profile.
even though you submit race, the profile of the player on cs still indicate their main race in the line up page... is that right?
On October 29 2010 14:57 NB wrote: problem occurred: LOTS of players use their 2nd race for 2v2 and csl website can only report 1 race.
Suggestion: make 2 teams declared their 2v2 race when they submit line up
? What do you mean? When you submit a lineup, you submit the race along with it. Your "default" race doesn't actually matter if you're good about submitting lineups, you can play whatever race you want, regardless of the race listed in your profile.
even though you submit race, the profile of the player on cs still indicate their main race in the line up page... is that right?
No, the race submitted in the lineup is the race listed on the match page.
On October 27 2010 21:29 yenta wrote: Second round slackers: University of Washington Sheridan College Thompson Rivers University University of North Texas
Lineups - SUP SUP?
Sheridan College originally submitted a lineup on Thursday, October 28 5PM EDT (late by over 24 hours). The lineup submitted was not valid for several reasons.
Sheridan College submitted a valid lineup on Friday, October 29 11PM EDT (late by over 48 hours). The resulting penalty is 2 automatic set losses (in the 4th set and ace set).
This is the first such penalty this Season. Let that be a warning to other teams!
On October 30 2010 08:46 shindigs wrote: I don't think Mibbit supports Quakenet when you try to the "Make match channel" option on the CSL site.
Explain what you're doing and what isn't working? We don't use mibbits and there is no "Make match channel option".
We use a qwebirc instance, which quakenet hosts. There have been no problems reported with it thus far. The second link spawns a connection to quakenet in an irc client (if you have one installed).
VODs should be scattered around http://www.livestream.com/dalhousiestarcraft . I'll organize them later I should add that Game 4 is absolutely awesome. You should watch it here, starting at like 5-7 minutes.
On November 03 2010 12:58 Impervious wrote: Will this affect anything?
Yeah, it would mess up with the player records... obviously changing your name in the middle of the match would be problematic. I'd stay away from that until our webmaster gets something implemented to support two names for a player.
On November 03 2010 12:58 Impervious wrote: Will this affect anything?
Yeah, it would mess up with the player records... obviously changing your name in the middle of the match would be problematic. I'd stay away from that until our webmaster gets something implemented to support two names for a player.
zz.
You can name change w/o any problems. Everything is based on your site id.
Third round slackers: Arizona State University British Columbia Institute of Technology Corban University University of California Santa Cruz University of North Texas University of British Columbia - Missing set 4 for some reason... California State University San Marcos
Lineups - SUP SUP? Update: looks like a bunch of lineups will be coming in soon.
On November 03 2010 12:58 Impervious wrote: Will this affect anything?
Yeah, it would mess up with the player records... obviously changing your name in the middle of the match would be problematic. I'd stay away from that until our webmaster gets something implemented to support two names for a player.
zz.
You can name change w/o any problems. Everything is based on your site id.
ZING, get owned nub! I should change my name to DarththienNOOOOBBBBBBBBB
Have any of the players changed their bnet names? That will mess up replay submissions until players update their CSL site profiles. Otherwise email the results and replays to the main CSL email and let them know the circumstances.
Kim.347 changed his name so I can't upload the replay. He is FoxeR.301 and he claims to have changed his info on the cstarleague website already. I sent the replay via email but If needed I can post it here.
On November 10 2010 04:57 Microlisk wrote: Are you guys really backlogged or something?
Did you send it to the main CSL email? I would also recommend contacting your division admins and letting them know, they can hassle staff and teams to get things done faster.
On November 10 2010 04:57 Microlisk wrote: Are you guys really backlogged or something?
Yes ^^. Our webmaster is sick as well. If you sent it to cstarleague@gmail.com, we'll get to it eventually, no worries.
Running CSL is close to a fulltime job for many of our positions. I've been a bit sick / caught up in handling some real life problems. Sorry to everyone for the increased amount of wait time lately - We'll try to get caught up as soon as possible.
4th round slackers: California Polytechnic State University Emory University (replaced University of Wisconsin Madison) Tufts University University of Toronto Lawrence University Grand Valley State University University of North Texas
With matches that have substitutes, how do get our replays submitted? I believe my school's coordinator has contacted the admins, but 2 of the match's replays are not able to submit due to the mismatched names of the players.
Or rather, the rules speak of the penalties for late submission of replays. Are we still held accountable for "late" replays for games with substituted players?
On November 17 2010 03:47 N.geNuity wrote: With matches that have substitutes, how do get our replays submitted? I believe my school's coordinator has contacted the admins, but 2 of the match's replays are not able to submit due to the mismatched names of the players.
Or rather, the rules speak of the penalties for late submission of replays. Are we still held accountable for "late" replays for games with substituted players?
5th round slackers: University of Pennsylvania Willamette University - Forfeits this round by request University of Houston Corban University University of California Santa Cruz University of Manitoba University of South Carolina Saint Olaf College Southern Polytechnic State University California State University San Marcos Randolph College
On November 17 2010 17:34 Saracen wrote: STOP using Lost Temple as an ace match map. PLEASE.
There are only 4 maps that cycle through as the ace match map. This is the second time it's the Ace match. You won't see it as the Ace for another 5 weeks.
On November 17 2010 17:34 Saracen wrote: STOP using Lost Temple as an ace match map. PLEASE.
You know, if you can't win on LT as a zerg, then you don't deserve to be your team's ace.
=)
Also, the Ace match doesn't have to be your team's absolute best player. It's not as if Oz/KT played JD/Flash for EVERY Ace match. You can have someone of the appropriate race (if u choose) practice for the Ace specifically, or you can even do it based on "sniping" the other team's Ace...
On November 17 2010 21:46 Kinky wrote: Just to clarify the rules on substitutions a bit, if I have this lineup A B C&D E
I can't substitute C with A/B/E?
This is correct.
On November 18 2010 01:14 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:
On November 17 2010 17:34 Saracen wrote: STOP using Lost Temple as an ace match map. PLEASE.
Seriously, out of 5 weeks, DQ and LTx2? >.<
Like I said, there are 4 maps in the cycle. zzz. These are our 4 "standard" Blizzard ladder maps (as opposed to the ICCup/non-ladder ones) - DQ, LT, Metalopolis, Xel'Naga. If you guys wanted something different, you should have said so when we asked you -_-. Also like... just field a Protoss/Terran on LT if it's such a big deal? I don't really see the problem. And it's not like Terran is unbeatable on LT vs Zerg or something...
I'm having a hard time finding people who will play the ICCUP/non-ladder maps..... Nobody likes them on my team..... It's also so much harder to prepare for a match on those maps, because they play differently than the ladder maps.....
On November 10 2010 04:57 Microlisk wrote: Are you guys really backlogged or something?
Yes ^^. Our webmaster is sick as well. If you sent it to cstarleague@gmail.com, we'll get to it eventually, no worries.
Running CSL is close to a fulltime job for many of our positions. I've been a bit sick / caught up in handling some real life problems. Sorry to everyone for the increased amount of wait time lately - We'll try to get caught up as soon as possible.
I'll be joining in soon too, so hopefully I can help out in that area!
Oh, and that does mean that further upgrades planned for CSL ranks (csl.zhanxz.net) are instead going to be incorporated into the main CSL site, as that would be much more convenient for usage. Expect to see new features there!
Or you could pick balanced maps for ace. Either way. It's kind of frustrating to lose an entire match because it's a ZvT on LT against MurdeR and you have to do a gimmicky build because he's probably going to be abusing the ledge, and you know that every other person on your team has a 0% chance of winning against him regardless of how much they prepare. It's kind of hard to "just field a Protoss/Terran on LT if it's such a big deal" when you only have 5 active players on your team's lineup, 4 of which can't even hit 1800.
What's stopping you from switching the ace match maps to more balanced ones in the future?
On November 18 2010 03:18 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: Wait what? So Fighting Spiit will never be the ace map? I thought all the maps would cycle...isn't that the point/how it's done in PL...
People didn't want that much focus on non-ladder map, so it doesn't share the same cycling.
On November 18 2010 05:36 Saracen wrote: Or you could pick balanced maps for ace. Either way. It's kind of frustrating to lose an entire match because it's a ZvT on LT against MurdeR and you have to do a gimmicky build because he's probably going to be abusing the ledge, and you know that every other person on your team has a 0% chance of winning against him regardless of how much they prepare. It's kind of hard to "just field a Protoss/Terran on LT if it's such a big deal" when you only have 5 active players on your team's lineup, 4 of which can't even hit 1800.
What's stopping you from switching the ace match maps to more balanced ones in the future?
Nothing's stopping us from changing the map pool. I'm just presenting the reasoning for the current one.
You should be thankful that you have 4 players that can hit 1700 then? Princeton has one or two players above 1600, and I'm fine with that. There are several schools that don't have ANY players above 1500. We can't do anything about what players you do or don't have at your school, or how many of them are active or inactive. I'm pretty sure there are more than 5 students at each school that would be willing to play. If they aren't good enough for you, that's your problem.
On the one hand, you can whine about it, and on the other you can practice against it, and just be the better player, can't you? How is it a 0% chance? Since you insist on fielding a Zerg on a map that "is imbalanced TvZ," why can't you just do something like 6 pool and take control of the game yourself?
On November 18 2010 06:08 DarthThienAn wrote: Since you insist on fielding a Zerg on a map that "is imbalanced TvZ," why can't you just do something like 6 pool and take control of the game yourself?
It almost sounds like 6 pool is a viable build instead of a gamble.
On November 18 2010 03:18 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: Wait what? So Fighting Spiit will never be the ace map? I thought all the maps would cycle...isn't that the point/how it's done in PL...
People didn't want that much focus on non-ladder map, so it doesn't share the same cycling.
On November 18 2010 05:36 Saracen wrote: Or you could pick balanced maps for ace. Either way. It's kind of frustrating to lose an entire match because it's a ZvT on LT against MurdeR and you have to do a gimmicky build because he's probably going to be abusing the ledge, and you know that every other person on your team has a 0% chance of winning against him regardless of how much they prepare. It's kind of hard to "just field a Protoss/Terran on LT if it's such a big deal" when you only have 5 active players on your team's lineup, 4 of which can't even hit 1800.
What's stopping you from switching the ace match maps to more balanced ones in the future?
Nothing's stopping us from changing the map pool. I'm just presenting the reasoning for the current one.
You should be thankful that you have 4 players that can hit 1700 then? Princeton has one or two players above 1600, and I'm fine with that. There are several schools that don't have ANY players above 1500. We can't do anything about what players you do or don't have at your school, or how many of them are active or inactive. I'm pretty sure there are more than 5 students at each school that would be willing to play. If they aren't good enough for you, that's your problem.
On the one hand, you can whine about it, and on the other you can practice against it, and just be the better player, can't you? How is it a 0% chance? Since you insist on fielding a Zerg on a map that "is imbalanced TvZ," why can't you just do something like 6 pool and take control of the game yourself?
Dude all I'm saying is that you have nothing to lose by improving the map pool for ace matches. No one cares how good any of my players or your players are. The point is that you would rather have balanced maps than imbalanced maps for ace, right? If you're trying to tell me you don't give a shit about the balance of ace match maps and everyone else who has a problem with it should just deal with it, then that's fine. I don't see what the point is in arguing with you if you're so adamant about your position, but seriously try to come off as less of a douche in the future, especially when you're trying to give useless advice like 6 pool against some of the better Terrans in NA in an ace match.
I talked to someone about it yesterday but yeah, I thought the idea of cycling maps was...you know...that we'd CYCLE them.
We've had Xel naga caverns and delta quadrant like 3 weeks in a row, and the idea of having iccup maps in the pool is because not all blizzard maps were acceptable, delta quadrant is a terrible map that should have had its chance to be rotated out after its 1 week of being on there.
Sorry Darth but DQ is definitely not considered a balanced map. Metalopolis XNC and Shakuras Plateau are considered 3 of the more balanced, Lost Temple and Steppes are next in line, everything after that has proven to be awful.
I'll stop slamming my head against the desk now, since it doesn't matter WHAT map I'm playing this week against qxc, I'll still lose, but I guess its fitting that it'll be on delta again.
nothing against the guys before me, but i should voice that my team has been very happy with the map pool. they hate playing on the iccup maps since they rarely play them if at all. I understand that balance is and should be an issue, but the original reasoning of having them this way to my understanding was for less active player who do not get to practice these iccup maps so much.
keep in mind though guys, i dont think the map pool will be changed regardless, the map orders have been decided for the whole season already
It shouldn't matter what the map is, the better player should be able to win regardless of they have played that map before or not. A lot of the iCCup maps are balanced and FUN!!! So use them more. You can practice vs friends on iCCup maps to learn the map if you want, but really it's your BO you should be worried about and not the map.
On November 18 2010 07:58 Saracen wrote: Dude all I'm saying is that you have nothing to lose by improving the map pool for ace matches. No one cares how good any of my players or your players are. The point is that you would rather have balanced maps than imbalanced maps for ace, right? If you're trying to tell me you don't give a shit about the balance of ace match maps and everyone else who has a problem with it should just deal with it, then that's fine. I don't see what the point is in arguing with you if you're so adamant about your position, but seriously try to come off as less of a douche in the future, especially when you're trying to give useless advice like 6 pool against some of the better Terrans in NA in an ace match.
It seems like running CSL really is a thankless job . Thanks for the input. Sometimes admins don't notice or aren't quite as qualified at SC to understand balance issues, so when someone brings it up we'll listen.
(and if someone brings it up with a scathing tongue, well, we'll try to justify our reasoning and THEN listen). From a personal standpoint, how can you even say that "no one cares how good any of my players or your players are" when you use it as your own argument? And why would you say Darth (and by extension CSL) don't give a shit about balance? We play in the league too.
Stop putting straw men in his mouth he didn't say he doesn't "give a shit." He's explaining how we made the map pool. Now that there are new maps aka Shakuras and stuff, we'll take everything into consideration and fix the map pool after Thanksgiving break.
Emailing us and explaining that "Dude all I'm saying is that you have nothing to lose by improving the map pool for ace matches" would help turn our attention to that issue quicker. And probably would be more helpful than calling Darth a douche.
Expect mid-season map pool changes, most likely after Thanksgiving or winter break.
On November 19 2010 05:11 hazelynut wrote: It seems like running CSL really is a thankless job . Thanks for the input. Sometimes admins don't notice or aren't quite as qualified at SC to understand balance issues, so when someone brings it up we'll listen.
I'd like to take this as an opportunity to thank everyone who works so hard to run CSL, I can only imagine how tough it must be to run something like this. Your hard work is much appreciated :D
On November 19 2010 05:11 hazelynut wrote: It seems like running CSL really is a thankless job . Thanks for the input. Sometimes admins don't notice or aren't quite as qualified at SC to understand balance issues, so when someone brings it up we'll listen.
I'd like to take this as an opportunity to thank everyone who works so hard to run CSL, I can only imagine how tough it must be to run something like this. Your hard work is much appreciated :D
I agree. I know I give you guys a lot of crap at CSL but I love you all and love what you do! I know you put a ton of work in and I loooove playing in CSL. It was so fun in BW and it's still fun in SC2 (When my team shows up! ;D )
Thank you everybody who runs the CSL and thanks to all of the volunteer division admins for helping out!!
On November 19 2010 05:37 Xeris wrote: SO EZ FOLKS! Obv Saracen upset because Caltech sux at CSL
<3
Obviously this is the case. We need more Koreans
Mona, the reason I said "no one cares how good any of my players or your players are" is that it had nothing to do with my point (that balanced maps are better than imbalanced maps for ace, and if there's nothing stopping you from changing them to more balanced maps, then you should, right?) It was just some tangent that stemmed from Darth saying something about sending other players besides myself for ace (hence the "you can just deal with the imbalance.")
Also, I have already sent a PM to Xeris about this (a while ago).
And I appreciate all that you guys do, even though I may not seem like it. I realize that running CSL is like having a part or full-time job with no pay, and you're doing it for our benefit. You guys have been really accommodating and understanding whenever shit happens (technical issues, no shows, breaking-of-rules, etc.) I can only imagine the shit you have to deal with, so I'm sorry for adding to your plate. You are all really nice guys with good intentions, and I'm really glad you're a part of the community. Thanks for running CSL, dudes. :3
I dont think its fair to play the "we get no thanks for our job" card whenever criticism comes up, it creates a circle of nothing improving from comments. I thought saracen was pretty justified in his criticism with LT being ace 2/3 weeks in a row, even if he said it with some negative emotion that's sure to come from frustration with a recent loss or something, but darth's response was pretty ridiculous given the situation. in the face of emotional complaints i'd expect admins to respond with less juvenile posts.
everyone is clearly very appreciative of the league and everything you guys are doing for us, but that's a given. if we can't come to you guys with complaints then we're not gonna get anywhere.
On November 19 2010 22:24 mOnion wrote: I dont think its fair to play the "we get no thanks for our job" card whenever criticism comes up, it creates a circle of nothing improving from comments. I thought saracen was pretty justified in his criticism with LT being ace 2/3 weeks in a row, even if he said it with some negative emotion that's sure to come from frustration with a recent loss or something, but darth's response was pretty ridiculous given the situation. in the face of emotional complaints i'd expect admins to respond with less juvenile posts.
everyone is clearly very appreciative of the league and everything you guys are doing for us, but that's a given. if we can't come to you guys with complaints then we're not gonna get anywhere.
This is probably the first time I've pulled that card, and with a "we'll be sure to listen to that criticism and change the map pool soon, with a tentative date" at that. I'm not sure what kind of evidence/experience are you basing this statement on. If there is cause for worry because admins dodge criticism, please bring it to my attention and we'll work on that.
On November 10 2010 04:57 Microlisk wrote: Are you guys really backlogged or something?
Yes ^^. Our webmaster is sick as well. If you sent it to cstarleague@gmail.com, we'll get to it eventually, no worries.
Running CSL is close to a fulltime job for many of our positions. I've been a bit sick / caught up in handling some real life problems. Sorry to everyone for the increased amount of wait time lately - We'll try to get caught up as soon as possible.
I'll be joining in soon too, so hopefully I can help out in that area!
Oh, and that does mean that further upgrades planned for CSL ranks (csl.zhanxz.net) are instead going to be incorporated into the main CSL site, as that would be much more convenient for usage. Expect to see new features there!
I'll try to set you up saturday morning, my time. If not than 100% on Sunday
On November 23 2010 18:54 hazelynut wrote: yes. happy thanksgiving (our webmaster is polish and hates holidays, so he sent you those reminders out of spite)
BTW - everyone should like The CSL @ Facebook and check out all the interviews, news reports, and standings @ THE CSL WEBSITE ! We're working hard to produce a lot of interesting content for you all this season!
Hope you all enjoy the off-week and have some fat turkey.
who is joe zhang o.o I have his email that i use for problems, I think he's our admin, but i have no idea how I got his email and he doesn't respond so I'm worried you guys arent getting my sub replays X_X
On November 27 2010 13:33 mOnion wrote: who is joe zhang o.o I have his email that i use for problems, I think he's our admin, but i have no idea how I got his email and he doesn't respond so I'm worried you guys arent getting my sub replays X_X
On November 27 2010 13:33 mOnion wrote: who is joe zhang o.o I have his email that i use for problems, I think he's our admin, but i have no idea how I got his email and he doesn't respond so I'm worried you guys arent getting my sub replays X_X
halp
Yeah, there's never any harm in CC'ing the cstarleague email when you email div admins with stuff like that.
On November 27 2010 13:33 mOnion wrote: who is joe zhang o.o I have his email that i use for problems, I think he's our admin, but i have no idea how I got his email and he doesn't respond so I'm worried you guys arent getting my sub replays X_X
On November 27 2010 13:33 mOnion wrote: who is joe zhang o.o I have his email that i use for problems, I think he's our admin, but i have no idea how I got his email and he doesn't respond so I'm worried you guys arent getting my sub replays X_X
6th round slackers: Utah Valley University University of Advancing Technology Reed College South Dakota School of Mines and Technology Warren County Community College British Columbia Institute of Technology Kwantlen Polytechnic University University of California Los Angeles Lawrence University Southern Polytechnic State University
My internet was down for three days. Sigh. Any way I can still submit my line-up with maybe only an ACE forfeit? British Columbia Institute of Technology co-ordinator here.
Guess I gotta get the number of my players so I can update them when this shit happens
7th round slackers: Utah Valley University - Officially withdrew Reed College University of Chicago City College of San Francisco Warren County Community College University of California Merced Stony Brook University Northwestern University University of Houston University of Manitoba Corban University University of Western Ontario - Rescheduled to some god knows when time and date University of California Los Angeles San Jose State University Sheridan College Oregon State University Wentworth Institute of Technology Northeastern University University of South Carolina Harvard University Lawrence University - Officially withdrew California State University San Marcos West Point - Forfeit this round Randolph College Southern Polytechnic State University UOITDurham College Thompson Rivers University
Last Round before Winter Break! BTW, thats 26 teams I'm guessing finals week.
On December 08 2010 20:12 yenta wrote: 7th round slackers: Utah Valley University - Officially withdrew Reed College University of Chicago City College of San Francisco Warren County Community College University of California Merced Stony Brook University Northwestern University University of Houston University of Manitoba University of Western Ontario University of California Los Angeles San Jose State University Sheridan College Oregon State University Wentworth Institute of Technology Northeastern University University of South Carolina Harvard University Lawrence University California State University San Marcos West Point - Forfeit this round Randolph College Southern Polytechnic State University UOITDurham College Thompson Rivers University
Last Round before Winter Break! BTW, thats 26 teams I'm guessing finals week.
Finals week for us but we got our shit done! Shame on these teams ^^
I sent an email to the CSL gmail acct about an error in uploading the replay for the first set of MIT vs UCSD, not sure if anyone got it. The site isn't accepting the replay, maybe because my opponent changed his name from what's listed on the site. What should we do? Would like to have a 1-3 loss instead of 0-3.
On December 13 2010 16:33 FiBsTeR wrote: I sent an email to the CSL gmail acct about an error in uploading the replay for the first set of MIT vs UCSD, not sure if anyone got it. The site isn't accepting the replay, maybe because my opponent changed his name from what's listed on the site. What should we do? Would like to have a 1-3 loss instead of 0-3.
Have your player change his name on his player profile, should be able to upload then. Let us know if you have any other issues.
i dont understand the way you guys treated teams in phoenix division once Utah Valley drop out. Clearly the teams that actually won vs Utah Valley (let say 3-0) is worth more point than a team who is given a free win. Not counting the fact that once the season end, you just simply cannot compare a team with 13 sets and 1 free win with 14 set wins right?
i suggest that you guys should have a clear rule for this kinda of situation since efforts SHOULD BE counted
On December 15 2010 08:09 NB wrote: i dont understand the way you guys treated teams in phoenix division once Utah Valley drop out. Clearly the teams that actually won vs Utah Valley (let say 3-0) is worth more point than a team who is given a free win. Not counting the fact that once the season end, you just simply cannot compare a team with 13 sets and 1 free win with 14 set wins right?
i suggest that you guys should have a clear rule for this kinda of situation since efforts SHOULD BE counted
The point of the preseason is to find the top schools in each division. To do this, you need to compare the teams against each other. If Utah is not among the teams, comparing the teams to Utah would be an inaccuracy.
Let's say for example there is a division with 8 team, team A through H. Let's say team A is the top team, because they are better than every single other team, and Team B is the runner up because they are better than every other team except for A. But team B beat Utah who dropped out, while team A was given a free win. Does this mean that team B is better than team A?
It's the same situation in phoenix division. How well teams scored vs Utah has no indication on how teams would rank vs each other. The only way to find which schools are the best in each division is to compare them with each other. Additionally, giving teams a bonus for beating Utah would be an unfair advantage over teams that did not play against them at all. If a team does not play against Utah, are they worse than a team that beat Utah?
On a similar note, are the matches that were forfeited by UWM going to be replayed in the Dragon Division? It seems like a bit of an advantage to the teams that had their matches with UWM wiped out to receive 3-0 wins while the rest of the teams in the division have to play their match against Emory.
The point of the preseason is to find the top schools in each division. To do this, you need to compare the teams against each other. If Utah is not among the teams, comparing the teams to Utah would be an inaccuracy.
Let's say for example there is a division with 8 team, team A through H. Let's say team A is the top team, because they are better than every single other team, and Team B is the runner up because they are better than every other team except for A. But team B beat Utah who dropped out, while team A was given a free win. Does this mean that team B is better than team A?
It's the same situation in phoenix division. How well teams scored vs Utah has no indication on how teams would rank vs each other. The only way to find which schools are the best in each division is to compare them with each other. Additionally, giving teams a bonus for beating Utah would be an unfair advantage over teams that did not play against them at all. If a team does not play against Utah, are they worse than a team that beat Utah?
what would you say if team B beat utah, utah got replaced by team X who is really strong and beats team A. what do you think about that?
I think the correct way of thinking about it is that utah loses but all records are removed. When a strong team enters, they suffer the penalty of losing to B and so that means they are actually weaker. I don't see how else you could do it unless you have a whole bunch of additional matches. Perhpaps more matches is fairest...would teams really mind playing 1 additional game?
The point of the preseason is to find the top schools in each division. To do this, you need to compare the teams against each other. If Utah is not among the teams, comparing the teams to Utah would be an inaccuracy.
Let's say for example there is a division with 8 team, team A through H. Let's say team A is the top team, because they are better than every single other team, and Team B is the runner up because they are better than every other team except for A. But team B beat Utah who dropped out, while team A was given a free win. Does this mean that team B is better than team A?
It's the same situation in phoenix division. How well teams scored vs Utah has no indication on how teams would rank vs each other. The only way to find which schools are the best in each division is to compare them with each other. Additionally, giving teams a bonus for beating Utah would be an unfair advantage over teams that did not play against them at all. If a team does not play against Utah, are they worse than a team that beat Utah?
what would you say if team B beat utah, utah got replaced by team X who is really strong and beats team A. what do you think about that?
When a new school is added, it will introduce a certain degree of inaccuracy due to that school not being able to play any school that Utah played. We want this inaccuracy to only affect team X by under-representing them and we do not want it to affect any other team. In order to do this, all of Utah's game must be disregarded. For the same reason why Utahs games must be disregarded, any game played by team X must be disregarded for the opposing team. For every original team in the group, their scores do not include either Utah or team X. This way, neither the removal of Utah or the addition of team X can affect the rankings in any way. Team X can be placed as first if they have more wins than team A, and can be placed second if they have more wins than B and less than A. Team X's record cannot be better than it would be if they were in the group from the beginning since every game missed counts against them. Therefore if team X got first, they deserved first, but if they got second, they may or may not have deserved first, but that's okay since they should have registered on time. This method works because no matter how good or how bad Utah and team X do, team B will never be above team A.
How do you suggest we compare schools then? ie. Team X will only have 9 games in the season, whereas other schools will have 16 games. Win percentage? Hard win/losses? Neither of these really work.
Say Utah played the 5 hardest teams in the division, and then they got replaced. Team X is worst than those teams but better than all of the other teams. They go 11-0. Other teams are, say, 12-4, 11-5, 13-3, 15-1, etc. How do we place them? If we do win percentages, then it's not really fair because Team X didn't have as many chances to "lose". Hard win/losses makes it pretty impossible for Team X to make playoffs. Or, even if the division is extremely even, and teams are something like 8-8, 9-7, and Team X has the most wins (10-1, 11-0, etc.), then that's not really fair either because they didn't have to play the "best" schools in that division.
There's no fair way of doing it..... There really isn't..... I can't think of a single situation where it works out in a fair way for everyone involved..... Adding teams seems to screw with the divisions, regardless of how you try to handle it.....
this situation is applicable to Emory University as team X, Chairman Ray. Emory auto-forfeitted their first 3 matches but are now doing quite well in their other matches
For most of us, exams are over. For the unlucky few who haven’t finished their exams, well, that’s pretty unfortunate; because a tournament for CSL players is happening at 4 pm on December 21, 2010. Nothing is on the line, except your pride and honour. Even though the sun is at its darkest for us tomorrow, our top CSL players have an opportunity to shine!
If you are interested in participating, send an email to logan@uostarcraft.com between 4 pm EST and 4:20 pm EST on the 21st, with your handle and character code, your race of choice for the tournament, and what school you are attending. The rules and format for the tourney will be posted on Teamliquid.net shortly after that, with the first round starting at 4:30. A link will be sent to all of the players.
The games will be cast and commentated on, so if there are any streamers interested in casting these games, send an email to logan@uostarcraft.com with your streaming info, handle, and character code.
Cheers! And see you on the electronic battlefield!
On December 19 2010 08:53 DarthThienAn wrote: How do you suggest we compare schools then? ie. Team X will only have 9 games in the season, whereas other schools will have 16 games. Win percentage? Hard win/losses? Neither of these really work.
Say Utah played the 5 hardest teams in the division, and then they got replaced. Team X is worst than those teams but better than all of the other teams. They go 11-0. Other teams are, say, 12-4, 11-5, 13-3, 15-1, etc. How do we place them? If we do win percentages, then it's not really fair because Team X didn't have as many chances to "lose". Hard win/losses makes it pretty impossible for Team X to make playoffs. Or, even if the division is extremely even, and teams are something like 8-8, 9-7, and Team X has the most wins (10-1, 11-0, etc.), then that's not really fair either because they didn't have to play the "best" schools in that division.
Under the status quo, placement is determined through wins, not through win percentage, so it's not a problem. A team going 12-6 will be ahead of a team going 11-0. Team X cannot obtain any advantage through this because if they skipped all the matches vs hard schools, they would have the same number of wins, and if they would have won some of those games, then they are under-represented. Both cases are perfectly fine.
To restate things, basically, inserting teams and deleting teams causes problems. Inserting a strong team will reward the teams that got a free win beforehand, and punish the teams that they play. In my previous post, I mentioned a solution, and what it does is emulate the standings where the inserted/deleted teams did not exist in the first place. This way, no team has an advantage over another. The inserted team has their number of wins, and if that number of wins allows them to qualify for playoffs, then they go to playoffs, because we know 100% sure that if that school was in the division in the first place, they would have gotten at least that many wins. If that school was just shy of playoffs because of auto-losses, and beat some of the playoff schools, they should try to sign up on time next season.
Emory hasn't caused any problems as of yet, but they have to lose to every school that has a chance of making playoffs. They have already given free wins to the two Maryland schools, which are two top schools in the division. If they beat all the other top schools, then it creates an inaccuracy.
On December 21 2010 16:16 Miles_Edgeworth wrote: Even if they do lose to all the other schools, it still creates a potential discrepancy with set differential.
Yes I agree, which is why I suggested to consider their scores completely independently. This is the closest way we're going to get fair results.
On December 29 2010 13:45 ZlaSHeR wrote: Unless they have an announcement during new years, but who would be the one to update csl's website at the stroke of midnight, meh
I have a question. I'm guessing you implemented the 2v2 match to attract a wider audience. During next year's season, do you plan on removing it? Everyone I've personally talked to, including all on my team, think a standard best-of-5 -- all 1v1's -- would be great.
On December 31 2010 20:41 Cedstick wrote: I have a question. I'm guessing you implemented the 2v2 match to attract a wider audience. During next year's season, do you plan on removing it? Everyone I've personally talked to, including all on my team, think a standard best-of-5 -- all 1v1's -- would be great.
We'll probably reinstate the poll and see how people feel about 2v2 next season, especially now that they've played a season with the current format and can make an informed decision. I know a lot of teams that like it, and I know just as many that are meh/slightly annoyed about it.
On December 31 2010 20:41 Cedstick wrote: I have a question. I'm guessing you implemented the 2v2 match to attract a wider audience. During next year's season, do you plan on removing it? Everyone I've personally talked to, including all on my team, think a standard best-of-5 -- all 1v1's -- would be great.
yea, i don't like 2v2s, princeton's 2v2 team seems to lose a lot =[.
I get a lot of players who ask about the status of 2v2 in CSL and if you can even play. I think a lot of people like the team aspect of it. Maybe it can be a separate minor league if you really need to separate it?
I like the new layout and the new features, but I don't really like the new background. Have you tried viewing the site with a bunch of different background images, or even with a solid color like before?
On January 03 2011 23:56 TestSubject893 wrote: New website looks great guys! I love it.
Quick question: How do you set your team's logo to be your actual logo, like some of the other schools have?
Send in a link to your mascot/logo-- our graphics guy is making these so that weird images don't get uploaded. It might take a little while to upload since he's making ~140, but it'll be up if you emailed us! :D
At first I was a bit eh on the site, then I realized all the school stats and rankings for each division are easily accessible on the front page. Then my mind exploded.
On January 04 2011 13:12 T.O.P. wrote: What's this new power rank thing?
Yeah i was curious about that too.
The power ranking system as it is right now is something left over from when we were placing you in your divisions. The calculations only cover the top 64, and need tweaking--I think yenta said that it calculates your chances in a Bo5 and Bo7. It'll be edited soon O_O!
On January 04 2011 13:12 T.O.P. wrote: What's this new power rank thing?
Yeah i was curious about that too.
The power ranking system as it is right now is something left over from when we were placing you in your divisions. The calculations only cover the top 64, and need tweaking--I think yenta said that it calculates your chances in a Bo5 and Bo7. It'll be edited soon O_O!
I think you guys screwed up with the power ranking thingy..... Apparently, we're in the top 64 (#41), but we've got a record of 0-7.....
It is based on the best BO5 and BO7 your team can put forward, off of ladder ranks. Spencer Snow was working on a better ranking system based on the traditional chess ranking systems, which the power rank will be replaced by.
Team Logos uploaded If you don't like the way your logo looks (for example, we used a low resolution image) or if we didn't include your logo in the update, you are free to make your own and email us the results at cstarleague@gmail.com. More info at the news post above.
<3 Josh
The only relevant change for this patch: Clicking on the CSL logo goes to the homepage. The news link now goes to the news archive.
The logos look really nice! Great job to Josh! I think there might have been a bit of a mix up with the U of A's logo, a different logo than the one I requested was used. I'll send one that I make myself.
On January 05 2011 14:26 TheRageKage12 wrote: Is this for everyone or just pros? :S
Everyone! As long as your a student at a university you can compete. You can see if your school already has a team or you can start your own if they don't
On January 05 2011 14:34 Miles_Edgeworth wrote: Are there going to be more logos added later? I know I sent a logo in, but there wasn't one updated for our team.
On January 04 2011 13:12 T.O.P. wrote: What's this new power rank thing?
Yeah i was curious about that too.
The power ranking system as it is right now is something left over from when we were placing you in your divisions. The calculations only cover the top 64, and need tweaking--I think yenta said that it calculates your chances in a Bo5 and Bo7. It'll be edited soon O_O!
So the number that is there is the seeding that you guys used at the beginning of the year to decide divisions?
On January 10 2011 03:12 Chairman Ray wrote: Replay uploaded. From all our past matches, usually the winner would upload it without us asking, but I guess they got excited and forgot
Btw, was the rule where you need 4 unique players for the first 3 sets removed? I think that would help us out a lot
Much appreciated. No, that rule hasn't been removed haha. You have so many players on your team, why do you need it changed?!
On January 10 2011 03:12 Chairman Ray wrote: Replay uploaded. From all our past matches, usually the winner would upload it without us asking, but I guess they got excited and forgot
Btw, was the rule where you need 4 unique players for the first 3 sets removed? I think that would help us out a lot
Much appreciated. No, that rule hasn't been removed haha. You have so many players on your team, why do you need it changed?!
Oh I was just wondering since they had a player who played twice in the first 3 matches
On January 10 2011 03:12 Chairman Ray wrote: Replay uploaded. From all our past matches, usually the winner would upload it without us asking, but I guess they got excited and forgot
Btw, was the rule where you need 4 unique players for the first 3 sets removed? I think that would help us out a lot
Much appreciated. No, that rule hasn't been removed haha. You have so many players on your team, why do you need it changed?!
Oh I was just wondering since they had a player who played twice in the first 3 matches
Oh wtf, I assumed the site had some sort of code preventing that. Let me contact the site staff and see what they say about the matter.
On January 04 2011 13:12 T.O.P. wrote: What's this new power rank thing?
Yeah i was curious about that too.
The power ranking system as it is right now is something left over from when we were placing you in your divisions. The calculations only cover the top 64, and need tweaking--I think yenta said that it calculates your chances in a Bo5 and Bo7. It'll be edited soon O_O!
So the number that is there is the seeding that you guys used at the beginning of the year to decide divisions?
Yes and no. The power rank is one of the three components we used to rank teams for divisions.
On January 10 2011 03:12 Chairman Ray wrote: Replay uploaded. From all our past matches, usually the winner would upload it without us asking, but I guess they got excited and forgot
Btw, was the rule where you need 4 unique players for the first 3 sets removed? I think that would help us out a lot
Much appreciated. No, that rule hasn't been removed haha. You have so many players on your team, why do you need it changed?!
Oh I was just wondering since they had a player who played twice in the first 3 matches
Oh wtf, I assumed the site had some sort of code preventing that. Let me contact the site staff and see what they say about the matter.
There are VERY strict rules in effect preventing this - we regularly receive complaints about them since coordinators do not realize that the rule is in effect. This rule still applies!!
Also - a call to everyone for feedback: The new site has been up for a while and we are looking for your input on improving usability, layout touch-ups and general feedback. If you have an ideas - feel free to respond here or email us (include a mock up if you can!)
our opponent still haven't submitted lineup yet. What happens if they miss it? The site says they get a warn, but do our lineups get revealed, or is it hidden until they submit their lineup?
On January 12 2011 15:51 Chairman Ray wrote: our opponent still haven't submitted lineup yet. What happens if they miss it? The site says they get a warn, but do our lineups get revealed, or is it hidden until they submit their lineup?
15 missing lineups for Round 9: Thompson Rivers University Southern Polytechnic State University Randolph College Mercer County Community College San Francisco State University San Jose State University Algonquin College Willamette University George Mason University Stony Brook University
Teams in danger of removal: North Carolina State University
Teams up for removal: California State University San Marcos Saint Olaf College Sheridan College Warren County Community College
University of Toronto may not have a Big Ten football team or a basketball team competing in March Madness that would gamer it a major sports reputation but then e-sports still has a long way to go. UofT not only competes, but thrives in the Collegiate StarLeague (C.S.L.) - a yearly tournament attended by schools all over the U.S. and Canada - where players match skills in Blizzard Entertainment's popular game Starcraft 2. This year marks UofT's third season since joining the C.S.L. and it currently stands at an impressive record of five wins and one loss. Its only loss came against Indiana University at a time when Uoff was missing one of its top players, Long Do. The league itself is split up into divisions and schools engage in a round-robin in each group. Only the top four teams in each division advance to the play-offs at the season's end. Even with its strong record, UofT struggles to find breathing room atop the standings. Along with Indiana University, Ohio State University, U.C. Berkeley, and u.e. Davis also sport formidable records in UofTs division. As a large school, UofT boasts a sizeable roster with over 30 people registered on the team. "I want everyone who wants' to join to meet up with people. I really try to encourage a Starcraft- Toronto community," says Do, who is in charge of coordinator duties for the team. Do, along with players Tony Huynh and Colin Sue-Chue-Lam, make up the core of the team that competes weekly. All three have ranked among North America's top 200 and have even played Major League Gaming stars such as Kevin "qxc" Riley and Chris "HuK" Loranger. With them at the helm, Uoff dominates Iv I matches but still admits to weaknesses. "To put it simply, our 2v2 sucks," confesses Huynh, referring to UofTs troubles in the doubles format. While they are not slated to faceoff during the regular season, UofT's team still considers Waterloo as its main rival.
Elsewhere, players look forward to specific match-ups as the tournament rolls on. "You look for certain players in schools. Some schools have one really good player with no one else good, while other schools have a bunch of decent players. It really depends on the player more than the school," explains Sue-Chue-Lam. As stiff as the competition is, UofT's primary concern is a familiar one: academics. Obligations at school have prevented UofT from unleashing its full strength or playing a match altogether. "The year before, we almost won the whole thing. Unfortunately, I was the coordinator and because I had a test the next day, I missed the deadline for line-up submissions. So we had to forfeit a game and that knocked us out of the tournament," recalls Do, noting a close call with the championship that eludes UofT.
Starcraft 2, released in late July, is still relatively new and Blizzard's attempt to perfect game balance is a developing process. Whether this affects UofT in its matches remains to be seen. Its season-ending matchup against the heralded U.C. Berkeley looks to be particularly intense as a potential decider for playoff positioning.
article makes it seem like im the only one on my team but all of our lineup are pretty solid and close in skill
submitting lineups is difficult on the new site, its semi-difficult finding the correct link among the list of matches. also, a division standings box would be useful on teams' profile page.
The newest SC2 patch has broken match reporting. Please refrain from uploading replays. Once your match is complete, create a replay pack and email us the pack along with match details to cstarleague@gmail.com
Hey, I'll be casting the epic match between the University of Alberta and the University of California Santa Barbara. Both teams are near the top of the division, and will be sending a full master's league lineup.
On January 15 2011 14:35 Chairman Ray wrote: Hey, I'll be casting the epic match between the University of Alberta and the University of California Santa Barbara. Both teams are near the top of the division, and will be sending a full master's league lineup.
On January 15 2011 14:35 Chairman Ray wrote: Hey, I'll be casting the epic match between the University of Alberta and the University of California Santa Barbara. Both teams are near the top of the division, and will be sending a full master's league lineup.
The following teams were removed from Season 4. All matches have been reversed and all remaining matches have been set to 0:3.
California State University San Marcos (93) Saint Olaf College (111) Sheridan College (95) Warren County Community College (257) University of Advancing Technology (229)
On January 16 2011 10:56 JiYan wrote: [BUG] the players i mark as inactive are still being shown on my roster
Thanks, added to the bug list
On January 16 2011 08:45 Miles_Edgeworth wrote: When will the results of the matches probably be posted?
I posted most of the replays and confirmed results posted by Xeris(?) for all but 6 matches. The rest will be posted as we get replies to emails.
On January 15 2011 11:43 yenta wrote: The newest SC2 patch has broken match reporting. Please refrain from uploading replays. Once your match is complete, create a replay pack and email us the pack along with match details to cstarleague@gmail.com
On January 19 2011 18:01 Kinky wrote: I submitted my lineups 10 minutes late. Am I gonna be penalized? T_T
Is your lineup up on the site? If it is than you were not late. If it isn't, you need to email it to us asap. You receive a warning if you are less than 24 hours late, and than your team is penalized a set loss for every additional 24 hours you are late, starting from the ace set.
Request: the maps are not up yet for the matches for week 11 (January 29th). UC Riverside would prefer to figure out who is playing on which map as soon as possible so that we can practice specifically for the maps as well. Perhaps you guys forgot to fill those out but i figure it shouldn't be too hard. If this is possible it would be nice :D
Round 10, 10 Teams a slackin`: Southern Poly. State UNE Lincoln Univ. Toronto San Francisco State Algonquin Corban U.C. Merced George Mason Emory Forfeits Season 4 and Sanghoo is banned from CSL for life. Univ. Waterloo
Emory has withdrawn from the CSL multiple times now (CSL Season 3, Registration for CSL Season 4, given a second chance in Season 4 and now they have withdrawn again--this is after a heartfelt email telling us that it is the coordinator's senior year and that he would like a final chance to play).
Not sure about power rank--I think it's calculated based on how well you would do in a Bo7.
Really wana highlight that this weekend will be the match between UWaterloo vs Cornell!!!! The MIRROR FEST!!!! Story: Uwaterloo: Power rank 1!!! Champion CSL season 2 with the line up contain most of the top tier players.(15 master league) but lost the 1st match to UFlorida... After that, UFlorida continue the unbeatable streak until they meet Cornell, located in the 5th spot of the phoenix division. This match vs UWaterloo might give them a ticket to the final play off this season....
NrGHumble is a veteran BW player in the old school clan NRG which is one of the top team atm on NA sever. The map is xel naga => 2 player map ZvZ... to cheese or not to cheese. Even though both of them are 2k7 2k8 master league, i would give the win to humble just bc he has a record 3-0 this season.
PvP on jungle basin. Now here is the deal: xiaofan is a Random player. this mean that in a mirror match up, the one who play main race will always has the adv. My prediction for this set gona be antimage win with a cannon rush .
Scorched Haven is a relatively small map compare to other 2v2 map. P and Z is a "deadly" aggressive combo among the 2v2 ladder and since 4 gates and speedlings is just almost impossible to stop... also noticed how both of these races are lack of early detection which mean that if you overly aggressive, the later punishment will be quite deadly ... prediction: Waterloo win since the P from Cornell is actually offracing (originally T), combatex and monk are both high level master league for their respective races.
seriously WTF... Cornell is sending a offrace player AGAIN... QuakerOats.696 who played Z in the 2v2 (his main race is Z) is now playing P vs KangPo, one of UWaterloo ace player....to play a mirror match up... something is seriously wrong here... UWaterloo 4-0 it is...
On January 20 2011 04:42 JiYan wrote: Request: the maps are not up yet for the matches for week 11 (January 29th). UC Riverside would prefer to figure out who is playing on which map as soon as possible so that we can practice specifically for the maps as well. Perhaps you guys forgot to fill those out but i figure it shouldn't be too hard. If this is possible it would be nice :D
uhm its kind of a few days before deadline and the maps still dont show for me. may we have an admin choose the maps for next weekend pleaseeee :D
Round 11, 6 Teams a slackin`: Clemson University University of Dayton Wentworth Institute of Technology University of South Carolina Southern Polytechnic State University St Lawrence College
I'm spamming facebook and twitter with this, might as well add it here.
Guess what match is happening tomorrow?
DALHOUSIE VS HARVEY MUDD THAT'S RIGHT.
Dalhousie (fighting!) is the only 11-0 school in CSL, with an unbelievably solid team that has difficulty dropping games. We've got Adebisi, Youtube commentator and competitor in the SCReddit Invitational. We've got the Legendary Muffin, who smashed ROOTsuggy so hard in our match against McMaster that he left his team. But we already know how awesome we are, so let me explain how awesome our opponents are.
Harvey Mudd is legendary. They started the season off 7-0, not dropping a single game until meeting Carnegie Mellon, UCF, and Oberlin, three of the strongest teams in the division. But that's not what matters here. TL old-timers might remember that Harvey Mudd is Day[9]'s alma mater. More importantly for this match, however, is the fact that ROOTqxc plays for them. That's right, qxc.
Why is this matchup going to be so awesome? Because we have two of the strongest teams in CSL fighting for playoff spots in Valkyrie division. If Dalhousie wins, Harvey Mudd will have trouble keeping in the top 4 against tough competition from McMaster, UCF, Oberlin, and UC Merced. If Harvey Mudd takes the match, then Dalhousie will lose its perfect record, making our matchups against UCF and Oberlin in the coming weeks essential.
That said, last time Dalhousie came up against a progamer in CSL, it didn't end so well for the progamer. Let's see if the "legendary" Muffin or one of our other top players can beat qxc so hard he leaves his team . Oh, did I mention that qxc is playing? WATCH IT.
Some information on the players... Adebisi: SCRI competitor, YT commentator, 3-0 in CSL, appearances in Blizzard + SC2ranks top200 SeaofStorms: DeSS SC2 Open winner, 4-0 in CSL, appearances in Blizzard top200 Muffin: FFC5 runner-up, 7-0 in CSL (2-0 against suggy), appearances in SC2ranks top200 ROOTqxc: really? best terran outside of Korea. SallyDesu: can beat the easy AI, really likes cookies
Is CSL going to consider going with the new GSL maps? Not being able to double bunker block the bottom of the maps will make many Zerg uni students happy
Round 12 - 12 Teams be forgettin' THE UNITED STATES MILITARY ACADEMY AT WEST POINT SOUTHERN POLYTECHNIC STATE UNIVERSITY - Removed from Season COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA YALE UNIVERSITY DARTMOUTH COLLEGE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TWIN CITIES QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY SACRAMENTO ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY
On February 04 2011 23:40 Kinky wrote: Is there a way to change our portrait or is everyone forever doomed to be Mengsk?
Next patch
Also, sorry if the site has been losing db during different times today - I have been digging through configs today to increase db performance and as a result have needed to restart the db at times.
On February 11 2011 20:40 Kinky wrote: I e-mailed CSL about changing a race in the lineup 2 days ago and I still haven't gotten a reply. Are you still waiting for the other team's response?
No, they no longer do it via email. Use their forums.
On February 11 2011 20:40 Kinky wrote: I e-mailed CSL about changing a race in the lineup 2 days ago and I still haven't gotten a reply. Are you still waiting for the other team's response?
they're not gonna let you change the race anyways. Next time choose the correct race :/
Round 14 - 12 Missing Lineups: Randolph College Wichita State University St Lawrence College -> removed from the rest of the season. Western Washington University University of South Carolina -> resigns from the rest of the season. Mercer County Community College University of Oregon University of Cincinnati Queen's University Stony Brook University -> removed from the rest of the season. Northwestern University University of Maryland College Park
University of South Carolina -> resigns from the rest of the season. St Lawrence College -> removed from the rest of the season. Stony Brook University -> removed from the rest of the season.
These 3 teams are up for removal in light of their recent inability to field players or submit lineups on time.
On February 26 2011 08:56 shindigs wrote: Are you going to some how work the new ladder maps into the Map Test tournament? Pretty sudden announcement from Blizzard's end O_O
uhh probably not. :D
On February 27 2011 10:06 Miles_Edgeworth wrote: Dragon division should get extra playoff representatives since we're SO STACKED.
THIS just in: UWaterloo has again claimed Power Ranking no.1 with 11 3k master players and our 2v2 pair is #40 in NA sever (according to sc2rank dot com)
We have safely secured our 1st position on Phoenix division and ready to crush Colorado next week! BRING IT ON PEACHES!!!
p/s: shout out to Endymion! good job! go team JA ;D
On February 27 2011 15:41 NB wrote: THIS just in: UWaterloo has again claimed Power Ranking no.1 with 11 3k master players and our 2v2 pair is #40 in NA sever (according to sc2rank dot com)
We have safely secured our 1st position on Phoenix division and ready to crush Colorado next week! BRING IT ON PEACHES!!!
p/s: shout out to Endymion! good job! go team JA ;D
On February 27 2011 15:41 NB wrote: THIS just in: UWaterloo has again claimed Power Ranking no.1 with 11 3k master players and our 2v2 pair is #40 in NA sever (according to sc2rank dot com)
We have safely secured our 1st position on Phoenix division and ready to crush Colorado next week! BRING IT ON PEACHES!!!
p/s: shout out to Endymion! good job! go team JA ;D
BRING IT WATERLOO!
We (Endymion) took out U Florida today, proving Xeris's predictions from two weeks ago wrong once and for all.
In all seriousness, grats on that accomplishment, you guys have a very intimidating lineup
On February 27 2011 19:13 Saracen wrote: How do you get a Power Ranking?
It's just based on your team's laddering. Ranks the theoretically best team based on our format. So I suppose you "get" one by being one of the top X schools in the CSL. I forget how many it goes up to.
On February 27 2011 10:06 Miles_Edgeworth wrote: Dragon division should get extra playoff representatives since we're SO STACKED.
Haha seriously, the four most probable outcomes of the next two weeks all end up with 4 teams tied for 3rd place. That said, UCR FIGHTING! Hope everyone had a good time tonight at HEAT (in the sub 40F weather).
How are tiebreakers determined? Is it by number of wins? What if you're tied with a school you've beaten? Does that take precedence over number of wins?
On February 28 2011 10:23 Saracen wrote: How are tiebreakers determined? Is it by number of wins? What if you're tied with a school you've beaten? Does that take precedence over number of wins?
Posting news to explain the playoffs, format, etc... next week ~~
Hey everyone - for those of you who missed out on the first ever CSL Starjeweled Tournament last Friday, I've uploaded a replay pack. Some things to note:
-The Grand Finals were never played. -Results will be spoiled... I'm assuming people that don't know the results don't care -The games toward the end are REALLY long, ie. over an hour. -Some notable teams to check out: Bro, Angel Power, WErMVP, GTR Soundboard, Cunning Linguists, SeXXX MasTuRz. -VOD can be found here. I had to stop casting because my internet connection blew up on itself, and after it came back, most of it was over. -I don't even know what happened in the first few rounds of the Loser's Bracket... tried to have other people take care of it but no one knew what they were doing lol. Too high expectations. At one point in the night, I was just like, "okay who's here and has a loss," and recreated the bracket. -Full Bracket can be found here. Sheet 2 contains the LB. -Some replays are missing...can't be helped . At least all of the last few rounds are there, and most of the WB as well
On February 27 2011 15:41 NB wrote: THIS just in: UWaterloo has again claimed Power Ranking no.1 with 11 3k master players and our 2v2 pair is #40 in NA sever (according to sc2rank dot com)
We have safely secured our 1st position on Phoenix division and ready to crush Colorado next week! BRING IT ON PEACHES!!!
p/s: shout out to Endymion! good job! go team JA ;D
Lol, you guys have no terran players, therefore you will lose.
Besides, we're not playing BO11s, we're playing BO5s. Berkeley has the best lineup.
On February 28 2011 15:56 DarthThienAn wrote: Hey everyone - for those of you who missed out on the first ever CSL Starjeweled Tournament last Friday, I've uploaded a replay pack. Some things to note:
-The Grand Finals were never played. -Results will be spoiled... I'm assuming people that don't know the results don't care -The games toward the end are REALLY long, ie. over an hour. -Some notable teams to check out: Bro, Angel Power, WErMVP, GTR Soundboard, Cunning Linguists, SeXXX MasTuRz. -VOD can be found here. I had to stop casting because my internet connection blew up on itself, and after it came back, most of it was over. -I don't even know what happened in the first few rounds of the Loser's Bracket... tried to have other people take care of it but no one knew what they were doing lol. Too high expectations. At one point in the night, I was just like, "okay who's here and has a loss," and recreated the bracket. -Full Bracket can be found here. Sheet 2 contains the LB. -Some replays are missing...can't be helped . At least all of the last few rounds are there, and most of the WB as well
I tried to help out with the LB with one of my friends. The biggest problem was that people would just leave once they lost and not report that they dropped down, or some people would disappear entirely and we weren't sure if games were played or not @_@
I think the Tournament turned out to be much much more serious business since I didn't think that many games would last an hour. CSL has too many pro StarJeweled players.
dem hour long games lulz. Even though pushing it back 3 hours made it able for a good 5-10 teams to be able to make the tournament, it also made everyone tired/leave earlier... lol xD. I'm debating between another SJ tournament, or a Lightcycles/Smashcraft tourney..
On February 27 2011 15:41 NB wrote: THIS just in: UWaterloo has again claimed Power Ranking no.1 with 11 3k master players and our 2v2 pair is #40 in NA sever (according to sc2rank dot com)
We have safely secured our 1st position on Phoenix division and ready to crush Colorado next week! BRING IT ON PEACHES!!!
p/s: shout out to Endymion! good job! go team JA ;D
Lol, you guys have no terran players, therefore you will lose.
Besides, we're not playing BO11s, we're playing BO5s. Berkeley has the best lineup.
Berkeley is noob. Toronto is better IMO. Also, RPI seems way underrated. Street is sick.
On February 27 2011 15:41 NB wrote: THIS just in: UWaterloo has again claimed Power Ranking no.1 with 11 3k master players and our 2v2 pair is #40 in NA sever (according to sc2rank dot com)
We have safely secured our 1st position on Phoenix division and ready to crush Colorado next week! BRING IT ON PEACHES!!!
p/s: shout out to Endymion! good job! go team JA ;D
Lol, you guys have no terran players, therefore you will lose.
Besides, we're not playing BO11s, we're playing BO5s. Berkeley has the best lineup.
who needs terran players? we have combatEx who just won vs Ddoro and dde last weekend LAN in toronto x)
jkjking, we do have lots of terran players but they just lazy to play for csl team and ladder =__=...
WE ARE CURRENTLY LOOKING FOR A PRO-CASTER to cast Waterloo vs Colorado this Saturday at 4PM.... Ofcrouse this match means notthing since both team already made it into play off but we promised you high level quality games!!!! Both 2 teams are top rank in Phoenix division with Beasty line up.
May I suggest a BW tournament sometime in the near future? For oldtimes sake? Watching the WCG 2005 video with tastless, day, and artosis makes me yearn form max 12 unit control groups, no worker rally, and retarded unit pathfinding. Those were the days~
On March 03 2011 17:17 shindigs wrote: Map test tournament was funsies to watch!
May I suggest a BW tournament sometime in the near future? For oldtimes sake? Watching the WCG 2005 video with tastless, day, and artosis makes me yearn form max 12 unit control groups, no worker rally, and retarded unit pathfinding. Those were the days~
bad idea... we already have 3 seasons of BW and since play off starting, i doubt any school could find BW players to enter. More over, im quite sure there is another BW tournament similar to CSL has started after CSL announce season 4 will be on sc2: find it in BW thread.
On March 03 2011 17:17 shindigs wrote: Map test tournament was funsies to watch!
May I suggest a BW tournament sometime in the near future? For oldtimes sake? Watching the WCG 2005 video with tastless, day, and artosis makes me yearn form max 12 unit control groups, no worker rally, and retarded unit pathfinding. Those were the days~
bad idea... we already have 3 seasons of BW and since play off starting, i doubt any school could find BW players to enter. More over, im quite sure there is another BW tournament similar to CSL has started after CSL announce season 4 will be on sc2: find it in BW thread.
On March 03 2011 17:17 shindigs wrote: Map test tournament was funsies to watch!
May I suggest a BW tournament sometime in the near future? For oldtimes sake? Watching the WCG 2005 video with tastless, day, and artosis makes me yearn form max 12 unit control groups, no worker rally, and retarded unit pathfinding. Those were the days~
well its not like we wont be able to find ANYONE... we still have a couple of B+ laddering hardcore on iccup but it just how many school would be interested in this...
On March 03 2011 17:17 shindigs wrote: Map test tournament was funsies to watch!
May I suggest a BW tournament sometime in the near future? For oldtimes sake? Watching the WCG 2005 video with tastless, day, and artosis makes me yearn form max 12 unit control groups, no worker rally, and retarded unit pathfinding. Those were the days~
Info: +Waterloo: season 2 CSL champion, Power ranking #1 with ~20 master league players, ~6 in top NA 200, Currently 1st place Phoenix division. +Colorado: 3rd place phoenix division. Took down last week 1st place team (UFlorida) by the super ace player: Endymion.
On March 05 2011 11:37 NB wrote: TOMORROW AT 4PM EST!!! Waterloo vs Colorado
Info: +Waterloo: season 2 CSL champion, Power ranking #1 with ~20 master league players, ~6 in top NA 200, Currently 1st place Phoenix division. +Colorado: 3rd place phoenix division. Took down last week 1st place team (UFlorida) by the super ace player: Endymion.
SwordxShield <Xel'Naga Caverns> SuNnIeJaI Endymion <Metalopolis> coLAntimage.511 Aldrovandi and nomsayin <Tarsonis Assault> CombatEX and OraCle (Auto lose due to bm chat.... no match was played) nomsayin <ICCup Sanshorn Mists> CombatEX Endymion <Lost Temple> coLAntimage.511 Colorado 2 - 3 Waterloo
P/s: We at waterloo apologise for any bm in advance. P/s 2: cmon guys, we already apologise b4 it happen...
GGs today, sorry about the bm loss but it really was totally uncalled for. CombatEX is a decent player but he needs to get his shit together and treat people like adults. Anyway you guys have a stellar lineup, I'm sure you'll do great in the playoffs.
On March 05 2011 11:37 NB wrote: TOMORROW AT 4PM EST!!! Waterloo vs Colorado
Info: +Waterloo: season 2 CSL champion, Power ranking #1 with ~20 master league players, ~6 in top NA 200, Currently 1st place Phoenix division. +Colorado: 3rd place phoenix division. Took down last week 1st place team (UFlorida) by the super ace player: Endymion.
SwordxShield <Xel'Naga Caverns> SuNnIeJaI Endymion <Metalopolis> coLAntimage.511 Aldrovandi and nomsayin <Tarsonis Assault> CombatEX and OraCle (Auto lose due to bm chat.... no match was played) nomsayin <ICCup Sanshorn Mists> CombatEX Endymion <Lost Temple> coLAntimage.511 Colorado 2 - 3 Waterloo
P/s: We at waterloo apologise for any bm in advance. P/s 2: cmon guys, we already apologise b4 it happen...
GGs today, sorry about the bm loss but it really was totally uncalled for. CombatEX is a decent player but he needs to get his shit together and treat people like adults. Anyway you guys have a stellar lineup, I'm sure you'll do great in the playoffs.
np, its his personality.
He even bm dde and desrow both in Toronto LAN while they all sitting in same room. The commentator for that game was like " somebody could go there and just stab combatex" but notthing happen ^_^.
On March 06 2011 08:28 DarthThienAn wrote: Hmm, the standings are wrong, Alberta should be 4th place right now I believe.
NOT FOR LONG
But yeah, same set differential as UCR at +27 and Alberta took the head-to-head 3:1, so they should be ahead.
Though in order for Alberta to make the playoffs I think they have to 3:0 or 3:1 College Park (15-1 currently) or UCR has to go 3:2 or worse against CSUSac (6-10; -6). I think spots 1-3 are pretty much locked given the tiebreaker rules (unless UMD BC chokes).
Alberta's got a tough match ahead of them and their playoff berth depends on it.
On February 27 2011 15:41 NB wrote: THIS just in: UWaterloo has again claimed Power Ranking no.1 with 11 3k master players and our 2v2 pair is #40 in NA sever (according to sc2rank dot com)
We have safely secured our 1st position on Phoenix division and ready to crush Colorado next week! BRING IT ON PEACHES!!!
p/s: shout out to Endymion! good job! go team JA ;D
Lol, you guys have no terran players, therefore you will lose.
Besides, we're not playing BO11s, we're playing BO5s. Berkeley has the best lineup.
who needs terran players? we have combatEx who just won vs Ddoro and dde last weekend LAN in toronto x)
jkjking, we do have lots of terran players but they just lazy to play for csl team and ladder =__=...
WE ARE CURRENTLY LOOKING FOR A PRO-CASTER to cast Waterloo vs Colorado this Saturday at 4PM.... Ofcrouse this match means notthing since both team already made it into play off but we promised you high level quality games!!!! Both 2 teams are top rank in Phoenix division with Beasty line up.
On February 27 2011 15:41 NB wrote: THIS just in: UWaterloo has again claimed Power Ranking no.1 with 11 3k master players and our 2v2 pair is #40 in NA sever (according to sc2rank dot com)
We have safely secured our 1st position on Phoenix division and ready to crush Colorado next week! BRING IT ON PEACHES!!!
p/s: shout out to Endymion! good job! go team JA ;D
Lol, you guys have no terran players, therefore you will lose.
Besides, we're not playing BO11s, we're playing BO5s. Berkeley has the best lineup.
who needs terran players? we have combatEx who just won vs Ddoro and dde last weekend LAN in toronto x)
jkjking, we do have lots of terran players but they just lazy to play for csl team and ladder =__=...
WE ARE CURRENTLY LOOKING FOR A PRO-CASTER to cast Waterloo vs Colorado this Saturday at 4PM.... Ofcrouse this match means notthing since both team already made it into play off but we promised you high level quality games!!!! Both 2 teams are top rank in Phoenix division with Beasty line up.
>: I play Terran and I play BW. Gtfo NB.
face the truth: you are all lazy to ladder... infinity 2-0 monk in toronto LAN but sitting at 2k4? while monk is 3k6? him and corinthos never play for csl this season =__=
On March 06 2011 11:18 MysticaL wrote: the playoffs rules suck tho, they don't prioritize teams with more wins when it comes to qualifying... like every other sport >_>
On March 07 2011 06:26 JiYan wrote: in dragon division, spots 2-6 are kind of all up for grabs you cant say anyone there is really locked in i dont think.
I wouldn't mind seeing an admin clarify the situation in the Dragon Division, since recent tiebreaker information either conflicts what we've been told previously or different admins are giving conflicting explanations of tiebreaking procedures.
On March 06 2011 11:18 MysticaL wrote: the playoffs rules suck tho, they don't prioritize teams with more wins when it comes to qualifying... like every other sport >_>
our opponents CSU Sacramento has not turned in their lineups. can an admin clarify if they forfeit any matches so we at UCR know what to expect this weekend?
On March 09 2011 17:45 JiYan wrote: our opponents CSU Sacramento has not turned in their lineups. can an admin clarify if they forfeit any matches so we at UCR know what to expect this weekend?
If they submit a lineup before tonight - no penalty. Before tommorrow night - ace loss Before friday night - ace loss + 4th set loss Anything after is auto loss.
i suppose if sacramento wants to forfeit the match - if they could let us know so that we can open up our schedules for other things that would be nice.
They have not given up, their coordinator was hospitalized recently and has been unable to put together his team. I've sent the respective schools and email explaining it, so hopefully things will get sorted out very soon
On March 11 2011 07:22 Thegilaboy wrote: They have not given up, there coordinator was hospitalized recently and has been unable to put together his team. I've sent the respective schools and email explaining it, so hopefully things will get sorted out very soon
On March 11 2011 07:22 Thegilaboy wrote: They have not given up, there coordinator was hospitalized recently and has been unable to put together his team. I've sent the respective schools and email explaining it, so hopefully things will get sorted out very soon
o.O. oh snap.
Yeah, it sounded pretty serious since a concussion was involved
On February 27 2011 15:41 NB wrote: THIS just in: UWaterloo has again claimed Power Ranking no.1 with 11 3k master players and our 2v2 pair is #40 in NA sever (according to sc2rank dot com)
We have safely secured our 1st position on Phoenix division and ready to crush Colorado next week! BRING IT ON PEACHES!!!
p/s: shout out to Endymion! good job! go team JA ;D
Lol, you guys have no terran players, therefore you will lose.
Besides, we're not playing BO11s, we're playing BO5s. Berkeley has the best lineup.
who needs terran players? we have combatEx who just won vs Ddoro and dde last weekend LAN in toronto x)
jkjking, we do have lots of terran players but they just lazy to play for csl team and ladder =__=...
WE ARE CURRENTLY LOOKING FOR A PRO-CASTER to cast Waterloo vs Colorado this Saturday at 4PM.... Ofcrouse this match means notthing since both team already made it into play off but we promised you high level quality games!!!! Both 2 teams are top rank in Phoenix division with Beasty line up.
>: I play Terran and I play BW. Gtfo NB.
face the truth: you are all lazy to ladder... infinity 2-0 monk in toronto LAN but sitting at 2k4? while monk is 3k6? him and corinthos never play for csl this season =__=
On February 27 2011 15:41 NB wrote: THIS just in: UWaterloo has again claimed Power Ranking no.1 with 11 3k master players and our 2v2 pair is #40 in NA sever (according to sc2rank dot com)
We have safely secured our 1st position on Phoenix division and ready to crush Colorado next week! BRING IT ON PEACHES!!!
p/s: shout out to Endymion! good job! go team JA ;D
Lol, you guys have no terran players, therefore you will lose.
Besides, we're not playing BO11s, we're playing BO5s. Berkeley has the best lineup.
who needs terran players? we have combatEx who just won vs Ddoro and dde last weekend LAN in toronto x)
jkjking, we do have lots of terran players but they just lazy to play for csl team and ladder =__=...
WE ARE CURRENTLY LOOKING FOR A PRO-CASTER to cast Waterloo vs Colorado this Saturday at 4PM.... Ofcrouse this match means notthing since both team already made it into play off but we promised you high level quality games!!!! Both 2 teams are top rank in Phoenix division with Beasty line up.
>: I play Terran and I play BW. Gtfo NB.
face the truth: you are all lazy to ladder... infinity 2-0 monk in toronto LAN but sitting at 2k4? while monk is 3k6? him and corinthos never play for csl this season =__=
Cause Monk likes me better ;3
pratice vs random: play super defendsively and drag it to a long macro game without dying to anysort of timing push.... they mostly gona cheese i guess
we are observing an big increase in number of pro-caster involve with our CSL matches as we are stepping into play off. I think CSL staff should do more write up and ads to make this big :D...
Also, if im interested to become a CSL staff, who should i contact? :D
University of Waterloo (1) University of Toronto (3) Indiana University (8) Dalhousie University DeSS (16) Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (27)
Noticed: Indiana and Toronto are both in Immortal with Toronto > Indiana in point but Indiana > Toronto in the match between these 2 :D
Interestingly in Dragon division: 3rd to 6th place are all tie with 14-3. U.C. Riverside luckyly pulled off a 4th spot to play off by the score of (47-17) as opose to Alberta (46-17) and McGill (46-17). Noticed how this is a Canadian massacre and Riverside will continue to face UWaterloo in play off, another Canadian team xD
In Leviathan: all top 4 are tied with 13-3 @_@ and most likely 14-3 since non of them are playing each other on the last match.... sickkkkk
In Nova: Tufts and Stanford are tightly tie at 4th and 5th place respectively: both are 13-4 with Tufts at (41-21) and Stanford at (46-26). Noticed how the difference between W-L are both 20... This situation should cause some drama since Standford 3-0 Tufts in the match result =__=
On March 12 2011 11:53 NB wrote: we are observing an big increase in number of pro-caster involve with our CSL matches as we are stepping into play off. I think CSL staff should do more write up and ads to make this big :D...
Also, if im interested to become a CSL staff, who should i contact? :D
Hmmmmmm......randomly found a B iccup zerg (and now masters zerg obviously) from our school (HMC) Wouldda definitely made out ream slightly stronger.
Well, congratz NYU from Valkyrie Division, I don't think anyone expected that comeback 4th spot snatcher ^^ Stars definitely alligned from me fucking up lineup submissions (I guess it was correct of you guys to not allow me to change...) and Oberlin losing their important matches.
I guess Oberlin had worse Karma from forcing us to forfeit matches for waiting 10 minutes and not rescheduling any of the matches.
Illinois 45-15 Riverside 47-17 Alberta 46-17 Mcgill 46-17
With simple math, illinois and riverside are tied with each other; alberta and mcgill are tied with each other but it doesnt matter because they are both under illinois and riverside. Illinois and riverside both have a differential of +30. Alberta and Mcgill have a differential of +29. Since Illinois and Riverside are tied, the next determiner should be who won the head to head match - Riverside.
Wouldnt this put Riverside as 3rd and Illinois as 4th seed? or am i wrong somewhere.
Illinois 45-15 Riverside 47-17 Alberta 46-17 Mcgill 46-17
With simple math, illinois and riverside are tied with each other; alberta and mcgill are tied with each other but it doesnt matter because they are both under illinois and riverside. Illinois and riverside both have a differential of +30. Alberta and Mcgill have a differential of +29. Since Illinois and Riverside are tied, the next determiner should be who won the head to head match - Riverside.
Wouldnt this put Riverside as 3rd and Illinois as 4th seed? or am i wrong somewhere.
As much as I would prefer to avoid Waterloo, that makes sense to me too.
just listened the audio interview with RIT and realize a fact: despite of being power rank 1 and season 2 champion: Uwaterloo CSL team has never been an official team/group/club.
We do not exist to the school and just a bunch of people get together mostly by real life or TL.net T_T... The list of players you see on the CSL website still missing some key players on campus who dont wana committ and a huge count of bronze/silver players @_@...Tragic :<
On March 13 2011 19:33 NB wrote: just listened the audio interview with RIT and realize a fact: despite of being power rank 1 and season 2 champion: Uwaterloo CSL team has never been an official team/group/club.
We do not exist to the school and just a bunch of people get together mostly by real life or TL.net T_T... The list of players you see on the CSL website still missing some key players on campus who dont wana committ and a huge count of bronze/silver players @_@...Tragic :<
Get on that, bro! Imagine what kind of funds you could get from Waterloo if they knew you placed 1st in a prestigious sports league ;D lol. Seriously, it's easier to make an organization than you think and it's AWESOME cause you can meet up, watch games on projectors/in lecture halls, buy pizza for your team, host ESPORTS events, etc.
On March 13 2011 10:40 ReketSomething wrote: Hmmmmmm......randomly found a B iccup zerg (and now masters zerg obviously) from our school (HMC) Wouldda definitely made out ream slightly stronger.
Well, congratz NYU from Valkyrie Division, I don't think anyone expected that comeback 4th spot snatcher ^^ Stars definitely alligned from me fucking up lineup submissions (I guess it was correct of you guys to not allow me to change...) and Oberlin losing their important matches.
I guess Oberlin had worse Karma from forcing us to forfeit matches for waiting 10 minutes and not rescheduling any of the matches.
Good job NYU!
sigh......
Winning/Losing the match against UCF actually wouldn't have changed anything for us because of the way tiebreakers work It would've came down to the match against Oberlin either way.
by the way, is there any way we can request having playoffs after quarter-system finals? im sure we are not alone in this, but UCR would greatly appreciate it if playoffs are played after finals (unless they are already like this than thank you :D)
On March 13 2011 10:40 ReketSomething wrote: Hmmmmmm......randomly found a B iccup zerg (and now masters zerg obviously) from our school (HMC) Wouldda definitely made out ream slightly stronger.
Well, congratz NYU from Valkyrie Division, I don't think anyone expected that comeback 4th spot snatcher ^^ Stars definitely alligned from me fucking up lineup submissions (I guess it was correct of you guys to not allow me to change...) and Oberlin losing their important matches.
I guess Oberlin had worse Karma from forcing us to forfeit matches for waiting 10 minutes and not rescheduling any of the matches.
Good job NYU!
sigh......
Winning/Losing the match against UCF actually wouldn't have changed anything for us because of the way tiebreakers work It would've came down to the match against Oberlin either way.
I meant oberlin losing to Mcmasters and so forth lol. when do we get our free mousepads? want to offer them as prizes for a school lan or something
On March 15 2011 07:14 JiYan wrote: by the way, is there any way we can request having playoffs after quarter-system finals? im sure we are not alone in this, but UCR would greatly appreciate it if playoffs are played after finals (unless they are already like this than thank you :D)
same here darren but i didnt want to wait until "surprise you guys are playing this saturday its already in the schedule" before putting in the request.
haha yeah I doubt it's gonna start this week... they don't even have the matchups up and lineups would've been due Tuesday night which is pretty short notice
Hmm... i would love to be able to click on the username at the comment section to link to user profile.... Its great to know who comes from where. :D....
On March 15 2011 20:21 NB wrote: Hmm... i would love to be able to click on the username at the comment section to link to user profile.... Its great to know who comes from where. :D....
What do you mean by this? I seem to be able to click on any username in the comments of a forum thread or news post and it will take me to their profile page.
On March 15 2011 20:21 NB wrote: Hmm... i would love to be able to click on the username at the comment section to link to user profile.... Its great to know who comes from where. :D....
What do you mean by this? I seem to be able to click on any username in the comments of a forum thread or news post and it will take me to their profile page.
:O.... my laptop is broken and using school PC lab which only has IE... Could it be the problem?
On March 15 2011 20:21 NB wrote: Hmm... i would love to be able to click on the username at the comment section to link to user profile.... Its great to know who comes from where. :D....
What do you mean by this? I seem to be able to click on any username in the comments of a forum thread or news post and it will take me to their profile page.
:O.... my laptop is broken and using school PC lab which only has IE... Could it be the problem?
<table class="comment"> <tr> <td class="comment-user"> <div class="user"> <div class="user-portrait"> <div style="background: url('/images/portraits/portraits-0-64.jpg') no-repeat scroll -128px -64px transparent; width: 64px; height: 64px;"> <div class="user-portrait-edge"></div> </div> </div> <div class="user-name">NoBody</div> </div> </td> <td class="comment-content"> <p>yes please ZOMG... only this weekend i get my new laptop :<....</p> <p>and the underpant is a trick question: Xeris has NONE!!!</p> </td> <td class="comment-info"> <a href="#7">#7</a> <div class="date">3/15/11 4:38 AM</div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="3" class="comment-links"><a href="/comment/edit/4502" class="button button-blue"><span><span>edit</span></span></a><a href="/comment/reply/542/4502" class="button button-blue"><span><span>reply</span></span></a></td> </tr> </table>
this is the code appeared on myside. noticed how it has no URL on it
I'm guessing it's the comp and/or browser you're using. I've checked it both on my PC at home, and my mac right here and I am able to click on any player name to get to their profile page. See if you can try it on another computer and if you're still having the problem
On March 15 2011 20:21 NB wrote: Hmm... i would love to be able to click on the username at the comment section to link to user profile.... Its great to know who comes from where. :D....
What do you mean by this? I seem to be able to click on any username in the comments of a forum thread or news post and it will take me to their profile page.
:O.... my laptop is broken and using school PC lab which only has IE... Could it be the problem?
<table class="comment"> <tr> <td class="comment-user"> <div class="user"> <div class="user-portrait"> <div style="background: url('/images/portraits/portraits-0-64.jpg') no-repeat scroll -128px -64px transparent; width: 64px; height: 64px;"> <div class="user-portrait-edge"></div> </div> </div> <div class="user-name">NoBody</div> </div> </td> <td class="comment-content"> <p>yes please ZOMG... only this weekend i get my new laptop :<....</p> <p>and the underpant is a trick question: Xeris has NONE!!!</p> </td> <td class="comment-info"> <a href="#7">#7</a> <div class="date">3/15/11 4:38 AM</div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="3" class="comment-links"><a href="/comment/edit/4502" class="button button-blue"><span><span>edit</span></span></a><a href="/comment/reply/542/4502" class="button button-blue"><span><span>reply</span></span></a></td> </tr> </table>
this is the code appeared on myside. noticed how it has no URL on it
I'm guessing it's the comp and/or browser you're using. I've checked it both on my PC at home, and my mac right here and I am able to click on any player name to get to their profile page. See if you can try it on another computer and if you're still having the problem
On March 15 2011 20:21 NB wrote: Hmm... i would love to be able to click on the username at the comment section to link to user profile.... Its great to know who comes from where. :D....
What do you mean by this? I seem to be able to click on any username in the comments of a forum thread or news post and it will take me to their profile page.
:O.... my laptop is broken and using school PC lab which only has IE... Could it be the problem?
<table class="comment"> <tr> <td class="comment-user"> <div class="user"> <div class="user-portrait"> <div style="background: url('/images/portraits/portraits-0-64.jpg') no-repeat scroll -128px -64px transparent; width: 64px; height: 64px;"> <div class="user-portrait-edge"></div> </div> </div> <div class="user-name">NoBody</div> </div> </td> <td class="comment-content"> <p>yes please ZOMG... only this weekend i get my new laptop :<....</p> <p>and the underpant is a trick question: Xeris has NONE!!!</p> </td> <td class="comment-info"> <a href="#7">#7</a> <div class="date">3/15/11 4:38 AM</div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="3" class="comment-links"><a href="/comment/edit/4502" class="button button-blue"><span><span>edit</span></span></a><a href="/comment/reply/542/4502" class="button button-blue"><span><span>reply</span></span></a></td> </tr> </table>
this is the code appeared on myside. noticed how it has no URL on it
I'm guessing it's the comp and/or browser you're using. I've checked it both on my PC at home, and my mac right here and I am able to click on any player name to get to their profile page. See if you can try it on another computer and if you're still having the problem
On March 15 2011 20:21 NB wrote: Hmm... i would love to be able to click on the username at the comment section to link to user profile.... Its great to know who comes from where. :D....
What do you mean by this? I seem to be able to click on any username in the comments of a forum thread or news post and it will take me to their profile page.
:O.... my laptop is broken and using school PC lab which only has IE... Could it be the problem?
<table class="comment"> <tr> <td class="comment-user"> <div class="user"> <div class="user-portrait"> <div style="background: url('/images/portraits/portraits-0-64.jpg') no-repeat scroll -128px -64px transparent; width: 64px; height: 64px;"> <div class="user-portrait-edge"></div> </div> </div> <div class="user-name">NoBody</div> </div> </td> <td class="comment-content"> <p>yes please ZOMG... only this weekend i get my new laptop :<....</p> <p>and the underpant is a trick question: Xeris has NONE!!!</p> </td> <td class="comment-info"> <a href="#7">#7</a> <div class="date">3/15/11 4:38 AM</div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="3" class="comment-links"><a href="/comment/edit/4502" class="button button-blue"><span><span>edit</span></span></a><a href="/comment/reply/542/4502" class="button button-blue"><span><span>reply</span></span></a></td> </tr> </table>
this is the code appeared on myside. noticed how it has no URL on it
I'm guessing it's the comp and/or browser you're using. I've checked it both on my PC at home, and my mac right here and I am able to click on any player name to get to their profile page. See if you can try it on another computer and if you're still having the problem
*cough* Hes not an admin *cough*
I'll fix it NB
Whoops, my bad yenta
Its ok, sorry if I sounded mean !! I am a cuddly coder!
On March 15 2011 20:21 NB wrote: Hmm... i would love to be able to click on the username at the comment section to link to user profile.... Its great to know who comes from where. :D....
What do you mean by this? I seem to be able to click on any username in the comments of a forum thread or news post and it will take me to their profile page.
:O.... my laptop is broken and using school PC lab which only has IE... Could it be the problem?
<table class="comment"> <tr> <td class="comment-user"> <div class="user"> <div class="user-portrait"> <div style="background: url('/images/portraits/portraits-0-64.jpg') no-repeat scroll -128px -64px transparent; width: 64px; height: 64px;"> <div class="user-portrait-edge"></div> </div> </div> <div class="user-name">NoBody</div> </div> </td> <td class="comment-content"> <p>yes please ZOMG... only this weekend i get my new laptop :<....</p> <p>and the underpant is a trick question: Xeris has NONE!!!</p> </td> <td class="comment-info"> <a href="#7">#7</a> <div class="date">3/15/11 4:38 AM</div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="3" class="comment-links"><a href="/comment/edit/4502" class="button button-blue"><span><span>edit</span></span></a><a href="/comment/reply/542/4502" class="button button-blue"><span><span>reply</span></span></a></td> </tr> </table>
this is the code appeared on myside. noticed how it has no URL on it
I'm guessing it's the comp and/or browser you're using. I've checked it both on my PC at home, and my mac right here and I am able to click on any player name to get to their profile page. See if you can try it on another computer and if you're still having the problem
*cough* Hes not an admin *cough*
I'll fix it NB
Whoops, my bad yenta
Its ok, sorry if I sounded mean !! I am a cuddly coder!
i understand that the coordinators are getting all the playoff info, but is it possible that you guys also post this info on the website? it would make the distribution of information much easier
Not sure if it was mentioned, but is there an option to resend the confirmation mail? It lists me as having an unverified account, but I didn't receive a verification email.
you guys should put the play off schedule on TL calendar... considering how all the random tourneys got up there, CSL deserve much more loves from the community. That way we will have more viewers and more attentions :D
On March 21 2011 09:46 JiYan wrote: not talking about which school we face, talking about which players we face. like revealing lineups so we know what mu to practice.
On March 23 2011 23:29 Thegilaboy wrote: You must learn the same lesson I learned....never ever trust darth
Bro I'm Town really!!
town is green/blue, not red assuming you are talking about mafia :D
but yeah, sometimes coordinator has a lack of communication channel to team member so posting the line up on CSL homepage would help a LOTS... Not even considering that is where we went to find our line up since the beginning of this season... =__=
On March 23 2011 23:29 Thegilaboy wrote: You must learn the same lesson I learned....never ever trust darth
Bro I'm Town really!!
town is green/blue, not red assuming you are talking about mafia :D
but yeah, sometimes coordinator has a lack of communication channel to team member so posting the line up on CSL homepage would help a LOTS... Not even considering that is where we went to find our line up since the beginning of this season... =__=
We are talking about mafia hahah, and he wasn't town, that's kinda the joke between he and I.
BUG: on the power ranks if two teams have the same team rating of lets say 1300, and they are ranked 40 and 40 respectively, the next team in the rankings is listed as 41 not 42.
On April 08 2011 14:56 JiYan wrote: BUG: on the power ranks if two teams have the same team rating of lets say 1300, and they are ranked 40 and 40 respectively, the next team in the rankings is listed as 41 not 42.
Thanks again to Monk for his time, and gogogo UW! There's also an interview with another Canadian uni (Wilfred Laurier) on the site, for those interested in the little team that could!
On April 08 2011 14:56 JiYan wrote: BUG: on the power ranks if two teams have the same team rating of lets say 1300, and they are ranked 40 and 40 respectively, the next team in the rankings is listed as 41 not 42.
Fixed this bug and switched from Glicko to ELO. Ratings seem much more solid.
Note: [i]I'm not a professional news person / caster / etc... I do these for fun! Don't expect me to be 100% unbiased, or censor myself! Hopefully they're enjoyable Also, hopefully I've improved since Week 1! Can't believe I've done these since November.
I am an incoming freshmen to Michigan State University, and I am looking to join the CSL team that they have established there, however, I cannot register on the site currently, anyone else having this problem or know the reason for this?
On July 13 2011 11:01 TheRPGAddict wrote: I am an incoming freshmen to Michigan State University, and I am looking to join the CSL team that they have established there, however, I cannot register on the site currently, anyone else having this problem or know the reason for this?
EPT![[image loading]](http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:aYnn7UxWIlPhYM:http://i453.photobucket.com/albums/qq251/hazelynut/cslbanner-1.jpg&t=1)
![[image loading]](http://www.cstarleague.com/sites/default/files/CSL%20Season%204%20map%20(2).png)
- Zerksys
. Though I guess people that know you will know?
They have to currently be attending school in order to be on the roster.
![[image loading]](http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a96/Weroe/bw/s4sex.png)
![[image loading]](http://209.85.62.26/12390/191/emo/teach.gif)
![[image loading]](http://www.cstarleague.com/sites/default/files/99 schools.png)
![[image loading]](http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/7059/55638327.png)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/FXmOb.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a96/Weroe/cslmmm.png)
Aruncart <Jungle Basin> 
Janook
tQJREX <Shakuras Plateau> ![[image loading]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v415/SniXSniPe/180878_1887611868972_1201696161_2354185_1860225_n.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/AGhqm.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://images.wikia.com/starcraft/images/f/f6/Overmind_SC2_Head1.jpg)
